From lawrence.auster at att.net Thu Jan 1 01:56:58 2009
From: lawrence.auster at att.net (Lawrence Auster)
Date: Thu, 1 Jan 2009 10:56:58 +0100
Subject: [Bandung-pm] Happy New Year and Bye Bye America?
Message-ID: <20090101095655.TAJX2682.hrndva-omta06.mail.rr.com@k4k6l>
Today was the last day of 2008, but what about tomorrow, White American Patriots? We all know something is up ? it doesn?t take a rocket scientist to figure that one out anymore. Will 2009 be the year all of us get turned into characters from some real-life, Great Depression movie? Will we all be rendered destitute, too concerned about getting something to eat, even beans or chitlens, then raising Cain with those Jew-corrupted SOB?s in Washington?
Washington has apparently been on some kind of script for the last two decades or longer, forcing NAFTA on us in the ?90?s and then allowing our manufactering to pull up stakes and move on to third world countries. Various financial bubbles have been given the legislative cultures to grow out of control and are now collasping in the same general time frame, right about when people warned us it all would happen. Gold prices have been artificially sat on, just so no one gets panicky ? yet.
They may have planned it all for 2009, but once they settled on Obama over Hillery, it was set off a little early to give their pocket Negro an election day boost. Goldman Sachs? Jew dupe, Hank Paulson, was told to make the call to Nancy Pelosi out of the blue and created a Wall Street furor that made 2008 the worst Stock Market decline since the Great Depression years in 1931 (it actually took 2 1/2 years from 1929 to drop 89%). Smaller Jew scum have been in a kind of rip-off mode for some time now, hearing rumors from ?on high? just what the big boys have been planning all along. They?ve gone on a feeding frenzy ? stealing what they can and salting it away in off-shore banks and over in that all-time den of thieves: Israel.
Go to the end for a quick poll on what YOU think.
Here?s the basic supposition: America is purposefully being brought to it?s economic and social knees, to roll out a socialistic North American Union (NAU) and bring in the Amero as the dollar replacement in 2010. I?ve been saying all this since around 2005, when I saw the handwriting on the wall with Bush and the SPP line of bull and so far, to me, it?s been obvious thats where we?ve been headed for with that Texas idiot, George W. Bush. He?s done the advance police state work for the Magic Negro.
Imagine all this for a minute: If they came right out in, say 1990, and told the American people that they wanted to turn America into a mere lobe of a Jew-controlled Global Government, install some skinny, lefty Mulatto as our president, redo the Constitution removing what?s left of our rights and admit millions of non-Whites into the country, what do you think would have happened?
White America would have gone totally ballistic. But that?s exactly the direction we are headed, sorry to say. It can?t be denied any longer. These bastards could never have been public about it all and made it to work, because we would have formed armies in the streets back then (and should do so now).
The evidence is clear-cut: A giant highway is now being built in Texas, up from the Mexican border, which the US Media has, more or less, kept us in the dark about (think about that one). They are discussing the possibility of hosting constitutional conventions, for whatever reasons. We now have a Mulatto?s family moving to DC this very weekend in advance of the phoney ?Inauguration? of the illegal immigrant usurper as we speak.
The legalization of the illegal non-White Mestizos is planned to go back on the traitor?s Capital Hill table in 2009, after being angrily and overwhelmingly protested against by the American public last year (May 07). The Jews of the ADL, SPLC and Jew media are now vigorously planning a big propaganda push for ramming this down America?s throat early in 2009. Even the border fence work has been stopped and some of this country?s traitors are now talking about demolishing what they?ve finished. The entire cabinet selections of Obama are supposedly pro-immigration.
Along with the legalization of those already here, expect talk about allowing more Africans to immigrate into the US and Western countries. Also, Section 8 Housing Act Negroes from the inner city are now in the process of moving into the suburbs and wreaking the typical kinds of Negro havoc. The government is actually paying two thirds of the rent money with your tax dollars (can you believe that crap?), for these crime-prone Negro families to essentially take over foreclosed properties. These Negroes are one truly spoiled rotten race.
Will some large, loud and nasty Negro family move in next door to you soon? If you?re a liberal, wait till this happens and, in about a week or so, you?ll no longer be so liberal and for ?diversity.? Trust me.
New waves of non-White Mestizos, up from Mexico, will soon be making their way here, once the legalization of the 30 million plus ones, already here, finally take place ? thanks to the new Lefty Democrat majority and Jew-corrupted Congress and Senate. Obama will whip that pen out faster than you can say ?Speedy Gonzales.?
Oh, I?m not the only person who thinks that all this is going down. Plenty of people and not just Alex Jones or Jerome Corsi. Sure, most of the sleeping sheep in FOX News land would rather watch some inanity on TV tonight ? you know, all the dancing crap and ball dropping bull. Hell, this country needs to drop it?s balls and drop some dimes on the bastards out there. Know what I?m saying?
Before I lose my cool about this topic, let me kindly suggest a few things. Get food and weapons. You should already have done so. You can buy common, easily stored stuff, like beans and rice, just remember to mark the purchase date on them with a black magic marker, so you can rotate them back in on a oldest date first basis. It?s not hard, but go to survivalist blogs/forums and read up on some things (put in some good links in the comment section below for people).
Buy a good handgun and maybe a riot shotgun and plenty of ammo. Learn how to use them safely and effectively. You want those things anyway, since Obama and his lefty cohorts will undoubtedly try to put a stop to buying them soon enough and the Negro crime rate is always horrible and now rising fast. Like the food business, check into the Gun blogs/forums from people who are into this kind of thing (and they?re are plenty, believe me).
Prepare yourself a ?bug-out? bag. Stuff you gotta have to live and extra clothes. You may need to vacate your area at a moment?s notice. I?ll be doing some specific blog postings here on all of this kind of thing shortly.
I?m not joking here. We are going in the direction of some serious stuff, quite probably Civil War stuff, whether you believe me or not. It?s inevitable. Just the business with Iran and the Mideast will soon throw us all under the bus in a major way. Whatever you can get and do in advance will be helpful. Remember the Boy Scout maxim to be prepared and that having it, even when you don?t need it, is a whole hellava lot better than not having it when you do.
?We will have a world government whether you like it or not. The only question is whether that government will be achieved by conquest or consent.?
? Jew Banker James Warburg, Feb. 17, 1950, (as he testified before the U.S. Senate). His father Paul Warburg founded the Council of Foreign Relations (CFR).
The Jews, once again, have destroyed a perfectly good country and brought us to the brink of global war. You can go give those bastards hell instead of me, the messenger.
I think that once White America gets it about Obama and who his masters really are, it?ll spread like wildfire and White Americans will start moving in the direction we should have done about 20 years ago. Don?t worry about the logistics and wheres for now, just equip yourself and work extra hard alerting your friends and family to the Jew part, while the Internet is still relatively free (Youtube is now being monitored and censored by the Jew ADL).
It?s time we take back this country and throw the bums out!
-----
Lawrence Auster,
1300 Wilson Blvd, Ste 120
Arlington, VA 22209-2312
From lawrence.auster at att.net Wed Jan 7 06:54:20 2009
From: lawrence.auster at att.net (Lawrence Auster)
Date: Wed, 7 Jan 2009 15:54:20 +0100
Subject: [Bandung-pm] Why Free Speech on the Holocaust?
Message-ID: <20090107145416.PVTK14459.hrndva-omta06.mail.rr.com@lyw42>
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
From lawrence.auster at att.net Fri Jan 9 02:15:54 2009
From: lawrence.auster at att.net (Lawrence Auster)
Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2009 11:15:54 +0100
Subject: [Bandung-pm] Israel: The Bernie Madoff of Countries
Message-ID: <20090109101548.ZFVR14459.hrndva-omta06.mail.rr.com@2ao1z>
Israel can now safely be called the Bernie Madoff of countries, at it has lied to the world about its intentions,
stolen Palestinian lands continuously since 1948, and managed to do all this with American tax payer?s
money. Every American taxpayer, starting with George W. Bush, has Palestinian blood on their hands
thanks to the butchers that run Israel.
Sderot, where a few homemade harmless missiles have landed, was once an Arab village called Najd,
whose 600 Arab inhabitants were expelled by Israelis in 1948. Jewish settlers built over the old town in
1951. Having been ethnically cleansed, the Arabs moved to the Gaza Strip, along with some other 750,000
Palestinians who had been removed from their lands?or murdered, like the villagers of Deir Yassin?before
the first Arab-Israeli war had even begun.
UN Resolution 194 and Article 13 of the UN Declaration of Human Rights say the people of Najd and
Palestine?s other 384 demolished villages must be allowed to go home. But they can?t because Israel
confines them in a small stretch of coastal desert that the Egyptian army held onto in 1949 and became a
dumping ground for the displaced population of southern Palestine. Ninety per cent of Gaza?s 1.5 million
people are refugees and their descendants. Israel won?t let them come back, nor will it let them have a
state of their own in Gaza and the West Bank even if they relinquish their right of return.
When Israel pulled out 8000 Israelis from Gaza in 2005, it funded immediately 12,000 new settlers in stolen
Palestinian lands on the West Bank. In other words, while neocon Zionists like Frum, Podhoretz and Kristol
trumpeted Israel?s withdrawal in the American media (neocon Zionists should be made to register as
foreign agents?which they are?of a terrorist state, to boot) Israel was stealing and settling more Palestinian
lands.
If Israel hopes to stop rocket fire?probably the most inefficient in history?it is going about it the wrong way.
Israeli Goebbelses keep asking Americans what they would do if someone fired rockets at them. Well,
let?s ask the same Americans what they would do if most of their towns and cities were cleansed of
Americans and driven into little strips along the Mexican border. What would Americans do if the Israelis
sealed off one of those refugee strips for 18 months and did not allow any medical or food assistance in or
the people out?legally an act of war. I can tell you what Americans would do, and it would be a damn sight
harsher and more effective than what the humiliated but not yet defeated Palestinians have been doing.
Americans have been totally brainwashed and lied to by Israel?s agents?the neocons and their useful
idiots. As soon as the murder of Palestinian children stops, Israel?s PR machine will go into overdrive, just
as it did following the killings of Lebanese and Palestinians in 2006. Next time a swaggering oaf like Frum,
Kristol or Podhoretz opens their mouth, stuff a bag of rotten eggs into it.
-----
You or someone using your email adress is currently subscribed to the Lawrence Auster
Newletter. To unsubscribe from our mailing list, please let us know by calling to 703 875-7600
Thanks,
Lawrence Auster,
1300 Wilson Blvd, Ste 120
Arlington, VA 22209-2312
From lawrence.auster at att.net Tue Jan 13 03:32:44 2009
From: lawrence.auster at att.net (Lawrence Auster)
Date: Tue, 13 Jan 2009 12:32:44 +0100
Subject: [Bandung-pm] Israel: The Bernie Madoff of Countries
Message-ID: <20090113113244.YAWH128.aarprv06.charter.net@2ao1z>
Israel can now safely be called the Bernie Madoff of countries, at it has lied to the world about its intentions,
stolen Palestinian lands continuously since 1948, and managed to do all this with American tax payer?s
money. Every American taxpayer, starting with George W. Bush, has Palestinian blood on their hands
thanks to the butchers that run Israel.
Sderot, where a few homemade harmless missiles have landed, was once an Arab village called Najd,
whose 600 Arab inhabitants were expelled by Israelis in 1948. Jewish settlers built over the old town in
1951. Having been ethnically cleansed, the Arabs moved to the Gaza Strip, along with some other 750,000
Palestinians who had been removed from their lands?or murdered, like the villagers of Deir Yassin?before
the first Arab-Israeli war had even begun.
UN Resolution 194 and Article 13 of the UN Declaration of Human Rights say the people of Najd and
Palestine?s other 384 demolished villages must be allowed to go home. But they can?t because Israel
confines them in a small stretch of coastal desert that the Egyptian army held onto in 1949 and became a
dumping ground for the displaced population of southern Palestine. Ninety per cent of Gaza?s 1.5 million
people are refugees and their descendants. Israel won?t let them come back, nor will it let them have a
state of their own in Gaza and the West Bank even if they relinquish their right of return.
When Israel pulled out 8000 Israelis from Gaza in 2005, it funded immediately 12,000 new settlers in stolen
Palestinian lands on the West Bank. In other words, while neocon Zionists like Frum, Podhoretz and Kristol
trumpeted Israel?s withdrawal in the American media (neocon Zionists should be made to register as
foreign agents?which they are?of a terrorist state, to boot) Israel was stealing and settling more Palestinian
lands.
If Israel hopes to stop rocket fire?probably the most inefficient in history?it is going about it the wrong way.
Israeli Goebbelses keep asking Americans what they would do if someone fired rockets at them. Well,
let?s ask the same Americans what they would do if most of their towns and cities were cleansed of
Americans and driven into little strips along the Mexican border. What would Americans do if the Israelis
sealed off one of those refugee strips for 18 months and did not allow any medical or food assistance in or
the people out?legally an act of war. I can tell you what Americans would do, and it would be a damn sight
harsher and more effective than what the humiliated but not yet defeated Palestinians have been doing.
Americans have been totally brainwashed and lied to by Israel?s agents?the neocons and their useful
idiots. As soon as the murder of Palestinian children stops, Israel?s PR machine will go into overdrive, just
as it did following the killings of Lebanese and Palestinians in 2006. Next time a swaggering oaf like Frum,
Kristol or Podhoretz opens their mouth, stuff a bag of rotten eggs into it.
-----
You or someone using your email adress is currently subscribed to the Lawrence Auster
Newletter. To unsubscribe from our mailing list, please let us know by calling to 703 875-7600
Thanks,
Lawrence Auster,
1300 Wilson Blvd, Ste 120
Arlington, VA 22209-2312
From lawrence.auster at att.net Tue Jan 13 06:30:24 2009
From: lawrence.auster at att.net (Lawrence Auster)
Date: Tue, 13 Jan 2009 15:30:24 +0100
Subject: [Bandung-pm] Israel's Onslaught on Gaza: Criminal, for Sure;
But Also Stupid
Message-ID: <20090113143024.XLIA21495.cdptpa-omta03.mail.rr.com@3lyw4>
Israel's Onslaught on Gaza: Criminal, for Sure; But Also Stupid
By ALEXANDER COCKBURN
In contrast to the grim forecasts of many fine contributors to this site over the past days, your CounterPunch editors have been inclined to take the view that Israel?s onslaught on Gaza, appalling though the carnage has been, is not only a crime but a blunder, like the attack on Lebanon in 2006, which demonstrated Israel?s military weakness, and the corruption of its armed forces after long years of bravely tormenting unarmed Palestinian peasants at check points, sawing down their olive groves and crushing their homes with bulldozers and high explosive.
The left has a tendency to demonize its enemies in terms of proficiency in administering their dastardly onslaughts. Through this optic, the claims of the arms manufacturers are always taken at face value, whether about the effectiveness of bunker busters, or devices to detect Hamas? Qassams. In our latest newsletter we print a long interview with Hamas? leader in Damascus, Khaled Meshal, conducted by CounterPuncher Alya Rea, myself and others, including former US Senator James Abourezk. Meshal made a case for Israel?s decline in military effectiveness:
Meshal: Since 1948, if we want to draw a curve of Israel?s progress, do you think that this curve is still heading up, or maybe is at a plateau, or is heading down? I believe that the curve is now in descent. And today, the military might of Israel is not capable of concluding matters to Israel?s satisfaction. Since 1948, you may notice that Israel has defeated 7 armies. In ?56 they defeated Egypt. In ?67 they defeated 3 countries: Egypt, Syria, and Jordan. In ?73, the war was somewhat equal in both sides between Egypt and Israel, if not for Nixon?s airlift to Israel?s forces at that time, the map of the world would be different. In ?82 Israel defeated the PLO in Beirut.
Khaled Meshal. Photo by Alexander Cockburn. Copyright 2009.
But since ?82, 26 years ago, Israelis has not won any war. They did not defeat the Palestinian resistance, and they did not defeat the Lebanese resistance. Since that time, Israel has not expanded but has contracted. They have withdrawn from southern Lebanon and from Gaza. These are indicators that the future is not favorable to Israel. Then today Israel, with all its military capabilities ? conventional and unconventional ? are not enough to guarantee Israel?s security. Today, with all these capabilities, they can?t stop a simple rocket from being launched from Gaza.
Hence the big question is, can military might ensure security? Hence, we may say that when Israel refuse the Arab and the Palestinian offer, a state of Palestine on the border of 1967, Israel is losing a big opportunity. Some years down the road, a new Palestinian generation, new Arab generations, may not accept those conditions, because the balance of power may not be in Israel?s favor.
Hamas, as I remarked last week, has been greatly strengthened by the current attack and the status of President Abbas reaffirmed as a spineless collaborator with Israel; Mubarak likewise; Syria and Turkey alienated from Western designs; Hezbollah and Iran vindicated by the world condemnation of Israel?s barbarous conduct. For months Israel besieged Gaza, starving its civilian inhabitants of essential supplies with no effective international reproach. It?s hard to take dramatic photographs of an empty medicine bottle, but easy to film a bombed out girl?s dorm or a Palestinian mother weeping over the bodies of her five dead daughters, featured on the front page of the Washington Post two weeks ago. Efforts to keep reporters out of Gaza have not been entirely successful, and both UN and Red Cross workers on the ground have sent outraged reports denouncing Israel?s barbarities. They have also been fierce State Department memos from USAID workers.
As we go into the weekend, an admittedly toothless resolution in the UN calling for a ceasefire was not vetoed by the US. The UK Guardian ran a story on Friday suggesting that my view expressed last week, that there were two ways to read Obama?s initial silence about the onslaughts ? which he was finally forced to break after Israel killed nearly 50 women and children trying to shelter in the UN School. The Guardian story began:
The incoming Obama administration is prepared to abandon George Bush's ?doctrine of isolating Hamas by establishing a channel to the Islamist organisation, sources close to the transition team say.
The move to open contacts with Hamas, which could be initiated through the US intelligence services, would represent a definitive break with the Bush presidency's ostracising of the group. The state department has designated Hamas a terrorist organisation, and in 2006 Congress passed a law banning US financial aid to the group.
The Guardian has spoken to three people with knowledge of the discussions in the Obama camp. There is no talk of Obama approving direct diplomatic negotiations with Hamas early on, but he is being urged by advisers to initiate low-level or clandestine approaches, and there is growing recognition in Washington that the policy of ostracizing Hamas is counter-productive. A tested course would be to start ?contacts through Hamas and the US intelligence services, similar to the secret process through which the US engaged with the PLO in the 1970s. Israel did not become aware of the contacts until much later.
One has to caution that there could be more than one reason for such a leak from the transition team ? including an alert to the Israel lobby to start piling on the pressure to head off any such contacts. With men like Emanuel and ?special assistant on the Middle East? Dan Kurtzer at Obama?s elbow, I imagine the Israeli embassy won?t have much difficulty in monitoring Obama?s plans, though his National Security Advisor, Jim Jones, apparently once filed a report to Condoleezza Rice with criticisms of Israel?s conduct so harsh that the whole report was hastily deep-sixed.
Since the Harvard Law Review is Running the Country, Let?s Look at Its Past
Read CVs of the impending Obama administration and you trip over the Harvard Law Review, starting with its former president, B. Obama. The top tier of Justice Department is to be stuffed with Harvard Law Review veterans: David Ogden, Deputy Attorney General,Harvard Law Review from 1979-81; Elena Kagan, Solicitor General, supervising editor of the Harvard Law Review, and graduated magna cum laude in 1986; Tom Perrelli, Associate Attorney General, managing editor of the Harvard Law Review, graduating magna cum laude in 1991. (The promising Dawn Johnsen, chosen to be Assistant Attorney General for the Office of Legal Counsel and most recently teaching at the University of Indiana, went to Yale Law School. Johnsen wrote harshly of Yoo?s torture memo. ?Where is the outrage, the public outcry?! The shockingly flawed content of this memo, the deficient processes that led to its issuance, the horrific acts it encouraged, the fact that it was kept secret for years and that the Bush administration continues to withhold other memos like it--all demand our outrage.?)
The Harvard Law School grads may take a different line, since they hail from an institution disgraced by Alan Dershowitz, a torture fan.
For an unsparing memoir of the spineless performance of the Harvard Law School in the red-scare McCarthy era I strongly recommend Jonathan Lubell?s account in our latest newsletter of how the School?s profs in the early 50s, led by Dean Erwin Griswold ? later LBJ?s Solicitor General -- tried to compel Jonathan and his twin brother David to testify about their activities as undergraduates at Cornell, opposing the Korean War. The Lubell boys stood firm and were then told they would not be welcome at the Harvard Law Review ?though their scholarly attainments should have guaranteed them slots there. No Law School grad would sit next to them at lectures or at their table in the School?s dining room. As some told them in later years, they feared that any contact with the Lubells would endanger their own careers. The School even pondered expelling them. Both Lubells went on to distinguished legal careers.
Hamas and the Harvard Law School, cheek by jowl in the latest newsletter. Subscribe now. You also get a great piece by P. Sainath on neoliberal terrorism in India There?s an excellent probe by Steve Higgs into the possible environmental causes of autism and a homage by yours truly to the late great English environmental writer Roger Deakin.
Subscribe Now!
Send Those Fan Letters Packing!
CounterPuncher Gary Murrell, who teaches at Grays Harbor College in Aberdeen, in Washington state, recently had this excellent letter in The Daily World, a newspaper published in Aberdeen.
I was astonished at the sentiments expressed by Mike Root, Angela Bishop and their fifth grade students as related in Callie White?s article in the Aberdeen Daily World, ?Harbor kids remember our soldiers serving overseas,? that appeared on Christmas Day.
Ms. White characterizes as ?overreaching? one student?s fear of being shot on the way to school if U.S. troops were not occupying countries around the world. Ms. Bishop singled out for approval a fifth grade student?s letter that claimed U. S. soldiers are ?making a ?path of peace? for generations to come. You are out on the battle field fighting for independence of the present and future.? Mr. Root asks, ?what better way to cheer a soldier up than with a pack of fan letters from his
class ??
Let me take Mr. Root?s comment first. What better way? One thing that occurs to me would be for thousands of citizens in our community to take to the streets, with their children and their children?s teachers, marching, demonstrating, demanding that the U. S. government withdraw all U.S. troops from more than 750 bases in more than 125 countries around the world. Thousands of citizens marching on Washington, D. C. demanding the end to the U. S. empire and the restoration of our republic. Thousands of citizens demanding that government look to the general welfare rather than the welfare of generals.
Where did Ms. Bishop?s students learn that the invasion of another country in a preventive war, a war crime, means that U. S. soldiers are making a ?path of peace? and ?fighting for independence?? In her class, by writing letters to ?heroes?? Peace for whom; independence for whom; at what cost? This is a fantasy land and a disservice to the young people who will one day be called upon to take the place of those occupation forces ? called upon by recruiters in their schools, urged on by teachers who filled them with propaganda about the heroic actions of U. S. troops overseas.
U. S. soldiers are not fighting for liberty; they are occupying countries that the United States invaded. Heroes? Our soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan, and the 150,000 mercenaries who supplement them, are being used as imperial storm troopers, as occupation forces. Torture. Indiscriminate killing. Secret prisons. Extraordinary renditions. The compliance of citizens in these grotesque actions has been extracted through fear. Of course, the ?overreaching? student reflects the propaganda being fed to all of us ? we are fighting them over there so we don?t have to fight them here.
What better way, Mr. Root? How about teaching students the difference between a republic and an empire? How about teaching students that no republic in history has lasted more than 300 years ? that they have been destroyed as they degenerated into empires? Instead of ?a pack of fan letters,? how about teaching them to write letters about their inheritance being squandered by the imperial dreams (nightmares?) of their leaders?
Gary Murrell
Hoquiam
Source: http://www.counterpunch.org/cockburn01092009.html
-----
You or someone using your email adress is currently subscribed to the Lawrence Auster
Newletter. To unsubscribe from our mailing list, please let us know by calling to 703 875-7600
Thanks,
Lawrence Auster,
1300 Wilson Blvd, Ste 120
Arlington, VA 22209-2312
Contact: lawrence.auster at att.net
-----
You or someone using your email adress is currently subscribed to the Lawrence Auster
Newletter. To unsubscribe from our mailing list, please let us know by calling to 703 875-7600
Thanks,
Lawrence Auster,
1300 Wilson Blvd, Ste 120
Arlington, VA 22209-2312
Contact: lawrence.auster at att.net
From lawrence.auster at att.net Thu Jan 22 06:36:51 2009
From: lawrence.auster at att.net (Lawrence Auster)
Date: Thu, 22 Jan 2009 15:36:51 +0100
Subject: [Bandung-pm] The problem with intellectually insecure whites
Message-ID: <20090122143710.LBSE3752.eastrmmtao104.cox.net@eastrmimpo01.cox.net>
The problem with intellectually insecure whites
Kevin MacDonald
January 19, 2009
America will soon have a white minority. This is a much desired state of affairs for the hostile elites who hold political power and shape public opinion. But it certainly creates some management issues ? at least in the long run. After all, it?s difficult to come up with an historical example of a nation with a solid ethnic majority (90% white in 1950) that has voluntarily decided to cede political and cultural power. Such transformations are typically accomplished by military invasions, great battles, and untold suffering.
And it?s not as if everyone is doing it. Only Western nations view their own demographic and cultural eclipse as a moral imperative. Indeed, as I have noted previously, it is striking that racial nationalism has triumphed in Israel at the same time that the Jewish intellectual and political movements and the organized Jewish community have been the most active and effective force for a non-white America. Indeed, a poll in 2008 found that Avigdor Lieberman was the second most popular politician in Israel. Lieberman has advocated expulsion of Arabs from Israel and has declared himself a follower of Vladimir Jabotinsky, the leading pioneer of racial Zionism. The most popular politician in the poll was Benjamin Netanyahu ? another admirer of Jabotinsky. Prime Minister Ehud Olmert and Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni are also Jabotinskyists.
The racial Zionists are now carrying out yet another orgy of mass murder after a starvation-inducing blockade and the usual triggering assault designed to provoke Palestinian retaliation ? which then becomes the cover for claims that Israel is merely defending itself against terrorism. This monstrosity was approved by overwhelming majorities of both Houses of Congress. The craven Bush administration did its part by abstaining from a UN resolution designed by the US Secretary of State as a result of a personal appeal by the Israeli Prime Minister. This is yet another accomplishment of the Israel Lobby, but one they would rather not have discussed in public. People might get the impression that the Lobby really does dictate US foreign policy in the Mideast. Obviously, such thoughts are only entertained by anti-Semites.
But I digress.
In managing the eclipse of white America, one strategy of the mainstream media is to simply ignore the issue. Christopher Donovan (?For the media, the less whites think about their coming minority status, the better?) has noted that the media, and in particular, the New York Times, are quite uninterested in doing stories that discuss what white people think about this state of affairs.
It?s not surprising that the New York Times ? the Jewish-owned flagship of anti-white, pro-multicultural media ? ignores the issue. The issue is also missing from so-called conservative media even though one would think that conservatives would find the eclipse of white America to be an important issue. Certainly, their audiences would find it interesting.
Now we have an article ?The End of White America? written by Hua Hsu, an Assistant Professor of English at Vassar College. The article is a rather depressing display of what passes for intellectual discourse on the most important question confronting white people in America.
Hsu begins by quoting a passage in F. Scott Fitzgerald?s The Great Gatsby in which a character, Tom Buchanan, states: ?Have you read The Rise of the Colored Empires by this man Goddard?? ? Well, it?s a fine book, and everybody ought to read it. The idea is if we don?t look out the white race will be?will be utterly submerged. It?s all scientific stuff; it?s been proved.?
Buchanan?s comment is a thinly veiled reference to Lothrop Stoddard?s The Rising Tide of Color which Hsu describes as ?rationalized hatred? presented in a scholarly, gentlemanly, and scientific tone. (This wording that will certainly help him when he comes up for tenure.) As Hsu notes, Stoddard had a doctorate from Harvard and was a member of many academic associations. His book was published by a major publisher. It was therefore ?precisely the kind of book that a 1920s man of Buchanan?s profile ? wealthy, Ivy League?educated, at once pretentious and intellectually insecure ? might have been expected to bring up in casual conversation.?
Let?s ponder that a bit. The simple reality is that in the year 2009 an Ivy League-educated person, "at once pretentious and intellectually insecure," would just as glibly assert the same sort of nonsense as Hsu. To wit:
The coming white minority does not mean that the racial hierarchy of American culture will suddenly become inverted, as in 1995?s White Man?s Burden, an awful thought experiment of a film, starring John Travolta, that envisions an upside-down world in which whites are subjugated to their high-class black oppressors. There will be dislocations and resentments along the way, but the demographic shifts of the next 40 years are likely to reduce the power of racial hierarchies over everyone?s lives, producing a culture that?s more likely than any before to treat its inhabitants as individuals, rather than members of a caste or identity group.
The fact is that no one can say for certain what multicultural America without a white majority will be like. There is no scientific or historical basis for claims like ?the demographic shifts of the next 40 years are likely to reduce the power of racial hierarchies over everyone?s lives, producing a culture that?s more likely than any before to treat its inhabitants as individuals, rather than members of a caste or identity group.?
Indeed, there is no evidence at all that we are proceeding to a color blind future. The election results continue to show that white people are coalescing in the Republican Party, while the Democrats are increasingly the party of a non-white soon-to-be majority.
Is it so hard to believe that when this coalition achieves a majority that it will further compromise the interests of whites far beyond contemporary concerns such as immigration policy and affirmative action? Hsu anticipates a colorblind world, but affirmative action means that blacks and other minorities are certainly not treated as individuals. And it means that whites ? especially white males ? are losing out on opportunities they would have had without these policies and without the massive non-white immigration of the last few decades.
Given the intractability of changing intelligence and other traits required for success in the contemporary economy, it is unlikely that 40 more years of affirmative action will attain the outcomes desired by the minority lobbies. Indeed, in Obama's America, blacks are rioting in Oakland over perceived racial injustices, and from 2002?2007, black juvenile homicide victims increased 31%, while black juvenile homicide perpetrators increased 43%. Hence, the reasonable outlook is for a continuing need for affirmative action and for racial activism in these groups, even after whites become a minority.
Whites will also lose out because of large-scale importation of relatively talented immigrants from East Asia. Indeed, as I noted over a decade ago, "The United States is well on the road to being dominated by an Asian technocratic elite and a Jewish business, professional, and media elite."
Hsu shows that there already is considerable anxiety among whites about the future. An advertizing executive says, ?I think white people feel like they?re under siege right now ? like it?s not okay to be white right now, especially if you?re a white male. ... People are stressed out about it. ?We used to be in control! We?re losing control?? Another says, "There?s a lot of fear and a lot of resentment."
It's hard to see why these feelings won't increase in the future.
A huge problem for white people is lack of intellectual and cultural confidence. Hsu quotes Christian (Stuff White People Like) Lander saying, "I get it: as a straight white male, I?m the worst thing on Earth." A professor comments that for his students "to be white is to be culturally broke. The classic thing white students say when you ask them to talk about who they are is, ?I don?t have a culture.? They might be privileged, they might be loaded socioeconomically, but they feel bankrupt when it comes to culture ? They feel disadvantaged, and they feel marginalized."
This lack of cultural confidence is no accident. For nearly 100 years whites have been subjected to a culture of critique emanating from the most prestigious academic and media institutions. And, as Hsu points out, the most vibrant and influential aspect of American popular culture is hip-hop?a product of the African American urban culture.
The only significant group of white people with any cultural confidence centers itself around country music, NASCAR, and the small town values of traditional white America. For this group of whites ? and only this group ? there is "a racial pride that dares not speak its name, and that defines itself through cultural cues instead?a suspicion of intellectual elites and city dwellers, a preference for folksiness and plainness of speech (whether real or feigned), and the association of a working-class white minority with 'the real America.'?
This is what I term implicit whiteness ? implicit because explicit assertions of white identity have been banned by the anti-white elites that dominate our politics and culture. It is a culture that, as Hsu notes, "cannot speak its name."
But that implies that the submerged white identity of the white working class and the lack of cultural confidence exhibited by the rest of white America are imposed from outside. Although there may well be characteristics of whites that facilitate this process, this suppression of white identity and interests is certainly not the natural outcome of modernization or any other force internal to whites as a people. In my opinion, it is the result of the successful erection of a culture of critique in the West dominated by Jewish intellectual and political movements.
The result is that educated, intellectually insecure white people these days are far more likely to believe in the utopian future described by Hsu than in hard and cautious thinking about what the future might have in store for them.
It's worth dwelling a bit on the intellectual insecurity of the whites who mindlessly utter the mantras of multiculturalism that they have soaked up from the school system and from the media. Most people do not have much confidence in their intellectual ability and look to elite opinion to shape their beliefs. As I noted elsewhere,
A critical component of the success of the culture of critique is that it achieved control of the most prestigious and influential institutions of the West, and it became a consensus among the elites, Jewish and non-Jewish alike. Once this happened, it is not surprising that this culture became widely accepted among people of very different levels of education and among people of different social classes.
Most people are quite insecure about their intellectual ability. But they know that the professors at Harvard, and the editorial page of the New York Times and the Washington Post, and even conservative commentators like Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity are all on page when it comes to racial and ethnic issues. This is a formidable array, to the point that you almost have to be a crank to dissent from this consensus.
I think one of the greatest triumphs of the left has been to get people to believe that people who assert white identity and interests or who make unflattering portrayals of organized Jewish movements are morally degenerate, stupid, and perhaps psychiatrically disturbed. Obviously, all of these adjectives designate low status.
The reality is that the multicultural emperor has no clothes and, because of its support for racial Zionism and the racialism of ethnic minorities in America, it is massively hypocritical to boot. The New York Times, the academic left, and the faux conservatives that dominate elite discourse on race and ethnicity are intellectually bankrupt and can only remain in power by ruthlessly suppressing or ignoring the scientific findings.
This is particularly a problem for college-educated whites. Like Fitzgerald's Tom Buchanan, such people have a strong need to feel that their ideas are respectable and part of the mainstream. But the respectable mainstream gives them absolutely nothing with which to validate themselves except perhaps the idea that the world will be a better place when people like them no longer have power. Hsu quotes the pathetic Christian Lander: "?Like, I?m aware of all the horrible crimes that my demographic has done in the world. ... And there?s a bunch of white people who are desperate ? desperate ? to say, ?You know what? My skin?s white, but I?m not one of the white people who?s destroying the world.??
As a zombie leftist during the 1960s and 1970s, I know what that feeling of desperation is like ? what it's like to be a self-hating white. We must get to the point where college-educated whites proudly and confidently say they are white and that they do not want to become a minority in America.
This reminds me of the recent docudrama Milk, which depicts the life of gay activist Harvey Milk. Milk is sure be nominated for an Oscar as Best Picture because it lovingly illustrates a triumph of the cultural left. But is has an important message that should resonate with the millions of whites who have been deprived of their confidence and their culture: Be explicit. Just as Harvey Milk advocated being openly gay even in the face of dire consequences, whites need to tell their family and their friends that they have an identity as a white person and believe that whites have legitimate interests as white people. They must accept the consequences when they are harassed, fired from their jobs, or put in prison for such beliefs. They must run for political office as openly pro-white.
Milk shows that homosexuals were fired from their jobs and arrested for congregating in public. Now it's the Southern Poverty Law Center and the rest of the leftist intellectual and political establishment that harasses and attempts to get people fired. But it's the same situation with the roles reversed. No revolution was ever accomplished without some martyrs. The revolution that restores the legitimacy of white identity and the legitimacy of white interests will be no exception.
But it is a revolution that is absolutely necessary. The white majority is foolish indeed to entrust its future to a utopian hope that racial and ethnic identifications will disappear and that they won?t continue to influence public policy in ways that compromise the interests of whites.
It does not take an overactive imagination to see that coalitions of minority groups could compromise the interests of formerly dominant whites. We already see numerous examples in which coalitions of minority groups attempt to influence public policy, including immigration policy, against the interests of the whites. Placing ourselves in a position of vulnerability would be extremely risky, given the deep sense of historical grievance fostered by many ethnic activists and organized ethnic lobbies.
This is especially the case with Jews. Jewish organisations have been unanimous in condemning Western societies, Western traditions, and Christianity, for past crimes against Jews. Similar sentiments are typical of a great many African Americans and Latinos, and especially among the ethnic activists from these groups. The ?God damn America? sermon by President Obama's pastor comes to mind as a recent notorious example.
The precedent of the early decades of the Soviet Union should give pause to anyone who believes that surrendering ethnic hegemony does not carry risks. The Bolshevik revolution had a pronounced ethnic angle: To a very great extent, Jews and other non-Russians ruled over the Russian people, with disastrous consequences for the Russians and other ethnic groups that were not able to become part of the power structure. Jews formed a hostile elite within this power structure ? as they will in the future white-minority America; Jews were ?Stalin?s willing executioners.?
Two passages from my review of Yuri Slezkine's The Jewish Century seem particularly appropriate here. The first passage reminds me of the many American Jews who adopt a veneer of support for leftist versions of social justice and racial tolerance while nevertheless managing to support racial Zionism and the mass murder, torture, and incarceration of the Palestinian people in one of the largest prison systems the world has ever seen. Such people may be very different when they become a hostile elite in a white-minority America.
Many of the commentators on Jewish Bolsheviks noted the ?transformation? of Jews [after the Bolshevik Revolution]. In the words of [a] Jewish commentator, G. A. Landau, ?cruelty, sadism, and violence had seemed alien to a nation so far removed from physical activity.? And another Jewish commentator, Ia. A. Bromberg, noted that:
the formerly oppressed lover of liberty had turned into a tyrant of ?unheard-of-despotic arbitrariness??. The convinced and unconditional opponent of the death penalty not just for political crimes but for the most heinous offenses, who could not, as it were, watch a chicken being killed, has been transformed outwardly into a leather-clad person with a revolver and, in fact, lost all human likeness. ...
After the Revolution, ... there was active suppression of any remnants of the older order and their descendants. ... The mass murder of peasants and nationalists was combined with the systematic exclusion of the previously existing non-Jewish middle class. The wife of a Leningrad University professor noted, ?in all the institutions, only workers and Israelites are admitted; the life of the intelligentsia is very hard? (p. 243). Even at the end of the 1930s, prior to the Russification that accompanied World War II, ?the Russian Federation?was still doing penance for its imperial past while also serving as an example of an ethnicity-free society? (p. 276). While all other nationalities, including Jews, were allowed and encouraged to keep their ethnic identities, the revolution remained an anti-majoritarian movement.
The difference from the Soviet Union may well be that in white-minority America it will not be workers and Israelites who are favored, but non-whites and Israelites. Whites may dream that they are entering the post-racial utopia imagined by their erstwhile intellectual superiors. But it is quite possible that they are entering into a racial dystopia of unimaginable cruelty in which whites will be systematically excluded in favor of the new elites recruited from the soon-to-be majority. It's happened before.
Kevin MacDonald is a professor of psychology at California State University?Long Beach.
URL with hyperlinks:
http://www.theoccidentalobserver.net/articles/MacDonald-Hsu.html
------
Who Benefits From White House Scandal(s)
?Monica-gate? did have Israeli origins
By Michael Collins Piper ? AFP
Republican critics of President-elect Barack Obama are enthusiastically shouting ?gotcha? in the wake of allegations that Gov. Rod Blagojevich (D-Ill.) was secretly trying to sell Obama?s vacant Senate seat. However, there are much bigger long-term policy implications at work behind the scenes.
The truth is that Illinois politics?particularly in Obama?s home base of Chicago?have long been known as a cauldron of venal political corruption with a handful of powerful secret interests directing the course of events. Even if Obama has ?clean hands,? the thread of corruption surrounding the governor and other Democratic power brokers may start to unravel, implicating many close Obama associates.
Already, Obama?s newly appointed chief of staff, Rahm Emanuel, is being implicated in the context of the bizarre Senate seat-for-sale tragicomedy.
TheWatergate affair, which came to light as a result of a break-in by operatives linked to the Republican Nixon administration, snowballed into a more-wide-ranging series of scandals involving influence peddling, obstruction of justice, bribery, illegal campaign contributions, etc, netting a host of GOP figures and ultimately bringing down Richard Nixon and Vice President Spiro Agnew.
Although an argument can be made that there was a secret agenda behind the Watergate affair?that it was effectively a coup d?etat designed to topple Nixon (who was intent on cleaning house in official Washington and redirecting U.S. foreign policy against the long-standing ?special relationship? with Israel)?the fact is that the scandal did entwine the president and prevent him from acting as he wished, and kept Nixon at bay for the two years following the 1972 election (which Nixon won by a landslide) until he was forced out of office.
The ongoing revelations in Illinois may well have a similar impact on the new Obama administration, keeping the president on edge, essentially destabilized.
This is precisely what happened with the so-called ?Whitewater? scandal that enveloped Bill and Hillary Clinton from virtually the first days of his administration, ultimately leading?through a tangled series of events?to the Monica Lewinsky mess, involving Bill Clinton?s illicit affair with a White House intern.
Despite the common (and quite inaccurate) perception? particularly by Clinton?s many ?conservative? critics?that somehow the ?liberal media? lionized Clinton during his presidency, nothing could be further from the truth. In fact, the truth is that throughout his presidency, Clinton was very much under fire from the mass media in America.
The record demonstrates that it was that media? which is controlled by Jewish families and financial networks sympathetic to Israel?which played such a large part in promoting public knowledge of the scandals surrounding the Clintons.
The January 4, 1999 issue of The Nation featured a revealing article by Michael Tomasky which examined this phenomenon in quite revealing detail.
Tomasky pointed out that it was actually The New York Times?the flagship ?liberal? newspaper?which played a substantial part in leaking many damaging revelations from the long-running investigation of President Clinton and Hillary Clinton by Special Prosecutor Ken Starr. Tomasky wrote: ?At every crucial turn and pivot, the Times? editorial page has marched in lockstep with the prosecutor and his cheering section.?
?Why is this worth remarking on?? asked Tomasky. Because, he pointed out, ?on national matters, [the Times? editorial] page serves as more of an ideological Baedeker, instructing the country?s elite as to what constitutes responsible liberal opinion.?
In other words, The New York Times?voice of the pro-Israel elite?was telling its readers that it was ?okay? to support Ken Starr?s maneuvering against Clinton. And so the question, then, was why one of America?s most liberal presidents would be the target of the editorial wrath of the very liberal New York Times.
The answer it was that it was because Bill Clinton was perceived to be insufficiently supportive of the demands of Israel. In fact, the Lewinsky scandal forced the president into retreat as far as pushing Israel was concerned?much to the delight of Israel?s Likud.
On Jan. 27, 1998 The Washington Post let the cat out of the bag when it reported that ?last week, Clinton demonstrated he could not compel the Israelis to meet their responsibilities for a further military pullback. This week [in the wake of the scandal] he is even less capable, if only because people in his own party, not to mention the Republicans, will not support a policy of greater pressure on Israel.?
Should there be any doubt that Bill and Hillary Clinton were certainly aware that the Lewinsky affair was being promoted by Israel?s Likudniks and their American allies, bear in mind that at the height of the Lewinsky frenzy the first lady publicly called for the creation of a Palestinian state. This was a clear shot over Israel?s bow, much to the shock of Israel?s U.S. partisans.
The first lady was, as a consequence, thrashed relentlessly by Israel?s partisans, but there?s no question that this was an obvious and calculated provocation by Hillary (and certainly her husband) meant to show her husband?s enemies that the Clintons could play hardball with Israel if necessary.
Although the Clinton administration itself formally distanced itself from Hillary?s remarks, the point had been made.
Ultimately?some seven years later, in December of 2005?the truth about the Israeli role in utilizing the Lewinsky affair to put pressure on Clinton emerged.
Television evangelist Jerry Falwell couldn?t resist bragging and admitting the truth: he and former Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin ?Bibi? Netanyahu did conspire? at a critical time?to trip up Clinton and specifically use the pressure of the Lewinsky scandal to force Clinton to abandon pressure on Israel to withdraw from the occupiedWest Bank.
Falwell?s confession didn?t make national news?as it should have. Instead, the preacher?s confession came buried in a lengthy story in the December 2005 issue of Vanity Fair, describing the flourishing love affair between American evangelicals such as Falwell and hard-line Jewish extremist forces in Israel then under the leadership of Binyamin ?Bibi? Netanyahu.
The admission by Falwell confirmed precisely what this author first revealed in The Spotlight in 1998 and later recounted in a lecture before the Arab League?s official think tank, the Zayed Centre in Abu Dhabi, in March of 2003.
Although, following my lecture, the Anti-Defamation League (ADL) of B?nai B?rith, a lobby for Israel, denounced as a ?bizarre conspiracy theory? my charge that ?Monica-gate? did have Israeli origins, the assertion by Falwell that the public unveiling of the Lewinsky affair forced Clinton to pull back on pressuring Israel confirmed exactly what I had charged.
Regarding Falwell?s recounting of how he worked with Netanyahu in undermining Clinton?s pressure on Israel, Vanity Fair reported:
On a visit to Washington, D.C. in 1998, Netanyahu hooked up with Jerry Falwell at the Mayflower Hotel the night before [Netanyahu?s] scheduled meeting with Clinton. ?I put together 1,000 people or so to meet with Bibi [Netanyahu] and he spoke to us that night,? recalls Falwell. ?It was all planned by Netanyahu as an affront to Mr. Clinton. . . . The next day, Netanyahu met with Clinton at the White House. ?Bibi told me later,? Falwell recalls, ?that the next morning Bill Clinton said, ?I know where you were last night.?? The pressure was really on Netanyahu to give away the farm in Israel. . . . It was during the Monica Lewinsky scandal . . . Clinton had to save himself, so he terminated the demands [to relinquish West Bank territory] that would have been forthcoming during that meeting, and would have been very bad for Israel.
What Falwell did not mention?at least as reported by Vanity Fair?is that his meeting with the Israeli leader took place on the very evening before the mass media in America broke open the Monica Lewinsky scandal with much fanfare.
Nor did Falwell mention that one of Netanyahu?s leading American publicists, neo-conservative power broker William Kristol, was the first American media figure to publicly hint (in the days before the scandal was officially unveiled) that there were forthcoming revelations regarding a sex scandal about to be unveiled to Clinton?s detriment.
The story of Clinton?s imbroglio with Israel is something Bill and Hillary Clinton would prefer be forgotten, but the lesson of Israel?s success in using such a scandal to batter Clinton is not something that Israel and its media allies will forget.
Barack Obama stands warned as his administration is now the subject of a frenzy of investigation and cover up surrounding corruption within the circles that brought him to power.
Source: http://www.davidduke.com/general/how-the-zionist-network-holds-scandals-over-american-politicans_7008.html
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
You or someone using your email adress is currently subscribed to the Lawrence Auster
Newletter. If you wish to unsubscribe from our mailing list, please let us know by calling to 1 212 865 1284
Thanks,
Lawrence Auster,
238 W 101 St Apt. 3B
New York, NY 10025
Contact: lawrence.auster at att.net
From lawrence.auster at att.net Mon Jan 26 08:33:42 2009
From: lawrence.auster at att.net (Lawrence Auster)
Date: Mon, 26 Jan 2009 17:33:42 +0100
Subject: [Bandung-pm] For Whom the Gaza Bell Tolls -- Part 1 and 2
Message-ID: <20090126163345.DLUZ28583.cdptpa-omta05.mail.rr.com@rpetu>
For Whom the Gaza Bell Tolls -- Part 1
By Edmund Connelly for The Occidental Observer
January 16, 2008
?The Israelis can kill whomever they want whenever they want.?
--Paul Craig Roberts
I sometimes think that it?s pointless for Americans to talk much about recent events in Gaza because we know how it will play out ? America will do absolutely nothing to interfere with the
ongoing massacre.
British journalist Robert Fisk reminds us of the drill:
So once again, Israel has opened the gates of hell to the Palestinians. Forty civilian refugees dead in a United Nations school, three more in another. Not bad for a night's work in Gaza
by the army that believes in "purity of arms." But why should we be surprised?
Have we forgotten the 17,500 dead ? almost all civilians, most of them children and women ? in Israel's 1982 invasion of Lebanon; the 1,700 Palestinian civilian dead in the Sabra-Chatila
massacre; the 1996 Qana massacre of 106 Lebanese civilian refugees, more than half of them children, at a UN base; the massacre of the Marwahin refugees who were ordered from
their homes by the Israelis in 2006 then slaughtered by an Israeli helicopter crew; the 1,000 dead of that same 2006 bombardment and Lebanese invasion, almost all of them civilians?
This time around, Israel shows not the slightest compunction about brazenly massacring an imprisoned population in front of the world. But why should they? They know no real
opposition will arise from power centers anywhere on earth. And they continue to have America ? Republicans, Democrats, Christian Zionists and almost everybody else ? in their thrall. In
large part, this is due to what Israel Shamir wrote with respect to Jewish financial mischief: ?The rich Jews buy media so it will cover up their (and their brethren's) misdeeds.?
James Petras also weighed in on Israel?s ongoing war against the Palestinians, writing, ?Israel?s sustained and comprehensive bombing campaign of every aspect of governance, civic
institutions and society is directed toward destroying civilized life in Gaza.? Echoing Shamir, Petras noted that Israel?s attempt to ?purge Palestine of its Arab population? continues without
apology because ?The Israeli totalitarian leaders knew with confidence that they could act and they could kill with impunity, locally and before the entire world, because of the influence
of the US Zionist Power Configuration in and over the US White House and Congress.?
Another voice that showed exasperation with Israel?s actions was that of Taki Theodoracopulos, who wrote, ?Israel can now safely be called the Bernie Madoff of countries, as it has
lied to the world about its intentions, stolen Palestinian lands continuously since 1948, and managed to do all this with American tax payer?s money.?
Perhaps no one, however, is more morally outraged than former Reagan administration official Paul Craig Roberts, who wrote on VDARE:
Caterpillar Tractor makes a special bulldozer for Israel that is designed to knock down Palestinian homes and to uproot their orchards. In 2003 an American protester, Rachel Corrie,
stood in front of one of these Caterpillars and was run over and crushed.
Nothing happened. The Israelis can kill whomever they want whenever they want.
They have been doing so for 60 years, and they show no sign of stopping.
Roberts continued, ?While the rest of the world condemns Israel?s inhumanity, the US Congress ? I should say the US Knesset ? rushed to endorse the Israeli slaughter of the Palestinians
in Gaza.? How pervasive was this endorsement? ?The US Senate endorsed Israel?s massacre of Palestinians with a vote of 100-0. The US House of Representatives voted 430-5 to
endorse Israel?s massacre of Palestinians. . . .? (See here for further details.)
Readers who have followed Roberts in the post-9-11 period know that he has been a persistent critic of Israel?s influence over President Bush and the Congress. He has not changed
his position with respect to Gaza either: ?The US Congress was proud to show that it is Israel?s puppet even when it comes to murdering women and children. The President of the
United States was proud to block effective action by the UN Security Council by ordering the Secretary of State to abstain.?
Two days later, Roberts added to his critique, displaying how fully Bush is a puppet to an Israeli master:
"Early Friday morning the secretary of state was considering bringing the cease-fire resolution to a UN [Security Council] vote and we didn?t want her to vote for it," Olmert said. "I said
?get President Bush on the phone.? They tried and told me he was in the middle of a lecture in Philadelphia. I said ?I?m not interested, I need to speak to him now.? He got down from the
podium, went out and took the phone call." [PM: Rice left embarrassed in UN vote, By Yaakov Lappin , Jerusalem Post, January 12, 2009].
Roberts then turned to a friend?s comments to summarize this exchange:
"Let me see if I understand this," wrote a friend in response to news reports that Israeli Prime Minister Olmert ordered President Bush from the podium where he was giving a speech to
receive Israel?s instructions about how the United States had to vote on the UN resolution. "On September 11th, President Bush is interrupted while reading a story to school children
and told the World Trade Center had been hit ? and he went on reading. Now, Olmert calls about a UN resolution when Bush is giving a speech and Bush leaves the stage to take the
call. There exists no greater example of a master-servant relationship."
Aptly, Roberts concluded, ?In his final press conference, President Bush, deluded to the very end, said that the whole world respects America. In fact, when the world looks at America,
what it sees is an Israeli colony.?
And the behavior of America?s master is none too pleasant, as retired U.S. Air Force Lieutenant Colonel Karen Kwiatkowski recently made clear:
One needs only to look at the death toll (one-sided), the difference in military capacities between Israel and Gaza (shocking) and the kind of arsenals employed by both sides to
determine what is happening. We?ve seen it on the elementary school playground, but this version is played out with incredible destructive force, no supervision, no brave friends, and
no justice.
Not only is incredible destructive force in view for the whole world, a bizarre Israeli response to the slaughter has surfaced: It is the "ultimate spectator sport," in the words of a London
Times reporter.
As a front-page article in the Wall Street Journal also described, from hilltops overlooking Gaza, Israelis would come with lawn chairs and picnics lunches to watch the one-sided death
circus that is Gaza. Israelis ?have made the trek, they say, to witness firsthand a military operation?so far, widely popular inside Israel?against Hamas, the militant group that controls the
Gaza Strip. Over the weekend, four teenagers sat on a hill near Mr. Danino's, oohing and aahing at the airstrikes. Nadav Zebari, who studies Torah in Jerusalem, was eating a cheese
sandwich and sipping a Diet Coke.?
Levinson took quotes from observers: "I've never watched a war before," one said. Meanwhile, a group of Israeli police officers took turns snapping pictures of one another with
smoking Gaza as a backdrop. "I want to feel a part of the war," was one comment.
?On another hilltop overlooking Gaza,? Levinson continued, ?Sandra Koubi, a 43-year-old philosophy student, says seeing the violence up close ?is a kind of catharsis for me, to get rid of
all the anxiety we have inside us after years of rocket fire? from Hamas.?
Perhaps most pointedly comes the testimony of one Jocelyn Znaty, ?a stout 60-year-old nurse for Magen David Adom, the Israeli counterpart of the Red Cross,? who could ?hardly
contain her glee at the site of exploding mortars below in Gaza.? "Look at that," she shouts, clapping her hands as four artillery rounds pound the territory in quick succession. "Bravo!
Bravo!" . . . I am sorry, but I am happy."
Pavel Wolberg/European Pressphoto Agency
Orthodox Jews watched smoke rise over the northern Gaza Strip Tuesday.
Roberts, like Taki and others, put much of the blame for such a spectacle clearly on the shoulders of the American public. ?What is happening to the Palestinians herded into the Gaza
Ghetto is happening because of American money and weapons. It is just as much an attack by the United States as an attack by Israel. The US government is complicit in the war
crimes.?
Repeating charges he has made consistently for years, Roberts laments the fact that "?Our? president was a puppet for a cabal led by Dick Cheney and a handful of Jewish
neoconservatives, who took control of the Pentagon, the State Department, the National Security Council, the CIA, and ?Homeland Security.? From these power positions, the neocon
cabal used lies and deception to invade Afghanistan and Iraq, pointless wars that have cost Americans $3 trillion, while millions of Americans lose their jobs, their pensions, and their
access to health care.?
While Roberts et al. may be right that each and every American taxpayer bears some responsibility for the carnage in Gaza, the fact is that most Americans are tired of violence in the
far-away Middle East. Besides, the economy is in the tank, the NFL playoffs are in progress, and the kids have to go back to school. Everyday life takes priority for most Americans.
Unfortunately, such short-sightedness will not do, for the pitiful denizens of Gaza are not the last targets of the Israeli army or the worldwide network of Diaspora Jews. The dispossession
of the Palestinians since 1948 is but a dress rehearsal for more ambitious dispossessions of non-Jews throughout the world.
Do I exaggerate? I believe that we have to take Israel Shamir seriously when he writes in Cabbala of Power. ?Palestine is not the ultimate goal of the Jews; the world is. Palestine is just
the place for the world state headquarters.?
Shamir has made a fascinating study of the two thousand-year struggle between Jews and non-Jews, particularly Christians. His arguments are far too subtle to summarize here, so
interested parties should consult the above-mentioned book as well as his more recent work, Masters of Discourse. I will simply cherry pick some of his more striking ideas.
Shamir ? an immigrant from Russia to Israel ? holds a low opinion of his fellow Jews in the Holy Land. ?Israelis are the riffraff of World Jewry, sent to conquer the land for the NWO HQ.?
This process is revealed in a parable of the "Messiah's Donkey" often used by religious Jews. This is a story in which disposable secular Jews (the donkey) are used by religious Jews to
attain religious, messianic goals. ?In plain words, spirit always wins over matter; the way of the Messiah of Spirit is to use the Donkey of Matter.?
?The Jews? ? Shamir makes a distinction between organized Jewry and individual Jews ? ?intend to turn Jerusalem into the supreme capital of the world, and its rebuilt temple into the
focal point of the Spirit on Earth.? Should they succeed, unspeakable despair will follow. ?Christianity will die, the spirit will depart from the nations in our part of the world, and our present
dubious democracy will be supplanted by a vast theocratic state. . . . De-spiritualized and uprooted, homeless and lonely, yesterday?s Masters of the World [non-Jews] will become
slaves in all but name.?
Shamir sees a two-pronged approach to this quest for world domination, Zionism and Mammonite Liberalism. ?While Zionism establishes the basis for the NWO HQ, the Mammonite
Liberalism establishes the world-wide slavery. Jabotinsky and Soros are doing different tasks for one system; the Iron Wall and the Open Society are just different names for the same
thing.?
Shamir?s analysis is eerily close to the Dispossessed Majority thesis of Wilmot Robertson, albeit cloaked in theological garb. Robertson described how in the 1960s and 70s white
American Christians ?had become a people of little or no account in their own country.? This was not an accident.
Source with hyperlinks: http://www.theoccidentalobserver.net/authors/Connelly-Gaza.html
-
For Whom the Gaza Bell Tolls -- Part 2
By Edmund Connelly
January 23, 2008
?Palestine is not the ultimate goal of the Jews; the world is. Palestine is just the place for the world state headquarters.? Israel Shamir in Cabbala of Power
"The United States is well on the road to being dominated by an Asian technocratic elite and a Jewish business, professional, and media elite." Kevin MacDonald
?We had no idea that we were about to trade places with the Black man.? Edgar Steele
In Part One of this essay, I argued that it was nearsighted to view the Israeli slaughter of Palestinians in Gaza as an isolated event. Rather, I suggested, the Jews were intent on
eventual world domination. Most certainly this is true with respect to Jewish power over white Christians.
To bolster that claim, I pointed to Wilmot Robertson?s observation in his book The Dispossessed Majority that in the 1960s and 70s white American Christians ?had become a people of
little or no account in their own country.? I then pointed to a theological explanation for this dispossession, turning to the views of Israel Shamir, who wrote, ?Christianity will die, the spirit
will depart from the nations in our part of the world, and our present dubious democracy will be supplanted by a vast theocratic state. . . . De-spiritualized and uprooted, homeless and
lonely, yesterday?s Masters of the World [non-Jews] will become slaves in all but name.?
For those not disposed to a divine view of this kulturkampf between Jews and whites, Shamir?s theological views can be piggy-backed onto secular arguments such as Robertson?s.
Rather than using Robertson?s arguments, however, I prefer to turn to an intriguing essay that appeared in a book edited by the late Sam Francis. Titled ?Race and Religion: A Catholic
View,? the essay was written by New Yorker Richard Faussette. Though Faussette situates his arguments in the Old Testament, his analysis is a sociological one in the mold of
evolutionary psychologist Kevin MacDonald?s theory on group evolutionary strategies.
Faussette?s analysis goes back to biblical times when Jews of that era implemented a system of niche recovery to compensate for their partial displacement by the Assyrians. Faussette
sees this system as being anachronistically employed to this day:
Our enemies are not Assyrians. They are the agents of the global economy; ethnic elites (their borders are where their people are) colluding with our own managerial elites. Mesmerized
by the prospect of fantastic incomes, they are centralizing the world?s economy and abandoning local loyalties for a ?citizenship? of the world. Unable to conquer us militarily, they have
succeeded in engaging our armed forces around the world as they repopulate our urban centers and our law enforcement agencies with an alien elite and an alien underclass rigorously
conditioned by the media.
If you conceived of this as today?s multiculturalism, which Faussette portrays as a new Babel and a recipe for disaster, you would not be wrong. But, should we surrender to this program,
we will suffer what Moses prophesized: ?You will become a horror, a byword, an object lesson to all the peoples amongst whom the Lord disperses you.?
Though some see the system of importing foreign populations as a lapse in judgment, Faussette claims that ?the system is not broken. It has been re-engineered by private interests and
liberal ideologues, lobbying our elected representatives to increase the flow of cheap labor and anything else they can profitably get over the border.?
If this system is not broken, who built it and for what purposes? In essence, the goal is to displace white Americans with non-whites, and in particular white elites with Jews. Shamir also
observed this: ?The Jews compete with the native elites of the Gentile society for the right to exploit the Gentile worker and peasant.? Outcompete is the more appropriate word, for
Shamir found that in 17th-century Ukraine Jewish masters were far more efficient, ?extracting from the natives SIX times more taxes and dues per person than a gentile landlord did.?
In this struggle with non-Jewish leaders, Jews can either massacre or expel their rivals, as they did in Russia during the Revolution. Shamir quotes Solzhenitsyn as follows:
[During the Bolshevik Revolution] executed army officers were Russians, the noblemen, priests, monks, deputies were Russians. . . . In 1920s, the pre-revolutionary engineers and
scientists were exiled or killed. They were Russians, while their place was taken by Jews. The best Russian Psychiatric institute in Moscow, its Russian members were arrested or exiled,
while their place was taken by the Jews. Important Jewish doctors blocked the advancement of Russian medical scientists. The best intellectual and artistic elites of Russian people
were killed, while the Jews grew and flourished in these (deadly for Russians) years.
While much of this has gone down the memory hole, an excellent confirmation of the above can be found in Yuri Slezkine?s expos?, The Jewish Century. Kevin MacDonald later
isolated the anti-Christian eliminationist focus of the Bolshevik attack, which can be found in his review of Slezkine called ?Stalin?s Willing Executioners?? (See here and here.) Chillingly,
Slezkine quotes Leonard Schapiro?s comment that ?anyone who had the misfortune to fall into the hands of the Cheka stood a very good chance of finding himself confronted with and
possibly shot by a Jewish investigator.? The Black Book of Communism estimates that up to twenty million Soviet citizens were murdered during the period of Jewish dominance in the
early decades of the USSR. This is why Slezkine originally coined the phrase ?Stalin?s willing executioners.?
So what does this have to do with America today? A lot, as both Faussette and MacDonald note. For the Jews? ancient displacement strategy is as effective as ever, as Jewish ethnic
activist Earl Raab made clear:
The Census bureau has just reported that about half of the American population will soon be non-white or non-European. And they will all be American citizens. We have tipped beyond
the point where a Nazi-Aryan party will be able to prevail in this country. We [Jews] have been nourishing the American climate of opposition to bigotry for about half a century. That
climate has not yet been perfected, but the heterogeneous nature of our population tends to make it irreversible ? and makes our constitutional constraints against bigotry more practical
than ever.
Because the West could not yet be conquered militarily, the Assyrian strategy of capturing and removing the native population, which demoralized the people and prevented organized
resistance, was untenable. The tactic then became the importation of foreign elements ?to devalue our niches, fragment our communities and place us under foreign administration. The
result is the same.? In other words, as Faussette writes, ?the Jews will recover their niches in the lost nation of Israel which will be a Jewish land under Jewish rule (homogeneous and
religiously unified), but the host nations where Jews settle in Diaspora are condemned to a fractious and imposed proto-Assyrian cultural pluralism (heterogeneous with no dominant
religious influence) that ensures Jewish hegemony in Diaspora.?
Often cloaked as ?anti-racism,? this program of dispossession applies equally to America and Palestine. ?Anti-racism,? Shamir writes, ?is a denial of the autochthon's [native?s] right to
decide his fate; a tool to separate Man from his native landscape. This concept de-legitimizes objections to swamping a land with a flood of immigrants and ruining the society's fabric.?
Again, because Jews in America are incapable of defeating or removing us militarily ? unlike their ability in the Middle East ? they resort to ideological attacks, an important one being the
imposition of their new religion, the Holocaust Narrative. ?Whoever accepts the Holocaust as the most important historical event,? Shamir quotes one thinker as saying, ?is able to carry
out the civil war against the traditionalist majority and becomes a member of the in-group for the globalists.?
Shamir adds how the Holocaust ?also has a theological value as this event is offered to supplant the Crucifixion for believers.? Certainly any Christian even half aware of culture and law
in the last half century must admit a growing emphasis on Jewish suffering and the guilt of the Christian West. There is a reason for this, as Shamir explains:
Slave cults are growing now among the Europeans, and the cult of the Holocaust is one of them. Theologically, this cult is an adaptation of the Jewish spiritual rule for Christian minds,
as it replaces Christ with Israel, Golgotha [Calvary] with Auschwitz, and the Resurrection with the creation of the Jewish state. People who argue with the dogma of Holocaust are met
with treatment the heretics were given in the days of yore. They are excommunicated and excluded from society.
Given the vast power of modern media, Jews have naturally turned to it as a means of control. The fracturing of native populations through use of the media is central to this. Faussette
makes this point with respect to the indigenous white population?s loss of the media:
If the majority of European American Christians held the most lucrative niches in American society, the media would be unable to depict us as a cruel and ?intolerant? majority whose
niches rightfully belong to the victims of ?white hatred and oppression.? The very fact that the media vilification of the European American Christian majority goes on apace is proof
positive that people who identify with us and have a concern for our welfare are no longer in the ascendancy. There may be many more of us, it is true, but we no longer occupy the
elite niches in which power is centralized. Even our ability to depict a positive image of ourselves to our own populations and to the peoples of the world has been wrested from us by
the hands of powerful and persistent detractors.
Examples of vilification of white men and elevation of Jews and other minorities are far too numerous to mention. The list of Holocaust and anti-Nazi films alone is massive. Add to that
the rise of African American movie stars such as Morgan Freeman, Denzel Washington, and Will Smith, most of whose movies fit the numinous Negro narrative, and you will have some
idea of the visual power arrayed against whites.
Faussette makes this clear:
It is not enough to say that the broadcast media are powerful. They create a separate and caustic virtual reality, then broadcast that ideologically driven reality into the homes of millions
of people and dare to suggest that their horrific depiction of us is an accurate reflection of who we really are, what we really do and what our history has really been. We are so saturated
with the propaganda many of us can no longer tell the difference between ideology and reality, nor are we the only ones upon whom this burden of a separate ?reality? has been
imposed. By the time an alien crosses our porous borders he has been conditioned by the international media to believe that the indigenous ?white people? are recent interlopers on their
own land; noxious bigots who stole the land from the noble people who were here before them. Millions of people are fed these overt and subliminal messages every day via continuous
media broadcasts.
The parallels with the propaganda techniques of the Communist Soviet Union, particularly in the early days, are manifest, as Faussette explains: ?Demonizing an indigenous majority
population to turn competing minority populations against them is a genocidal tactic with recent historical precedent.? Like the ?former classes? slated for elimination in Russia, the
American majority is now the targeted class.
The use of terror was prescribed then and is again being used, though ?many of us seem oblivious to what is going on here and now.? The terror comes through the educational and
media propagation of the notion that indigenous white Christians are the villain class. Or, if one prefers Jewish intellectual Susan Sontag?s version, ?The white race is the cancer of
human history.? Operating under the pretext that they are fighting for universal civil rights, Jewish activists, in a sense become the current equivalent of the Jews in Russia who were
?Stalin?s willing executioners.?
An integral part of this terror involves ritual public humiliation, another key aspect of the media?s strategy to demoralize the American majority. First and foremost is the public
dissemination of the message that whites are ?powerless to deflect the media barrage of humiliation and vilification of our race, our various ethnicities, our Christian religion and the
nation?s history.? Whites must now live quietly with the knowledge that infamies committed against them warrant no notice in the public eye, while any assault by an individual white on a
designated minority group will result in ritual condemnation of not only the assailant but the broader majority culture as well.
Thus, it was never just ?in the air? that the media, schools and legal system would take the turn they did in the 1960s against the American majority. Rather, it is another Jewish
movement, as Kevin MacDonald made clear recently in a column on this site:
For nearly 100 years whites have been subjected to a culture of critique emanating from the most prestigious academic and media institutions. . . . But that implies that the submerged
white identity of the white working class and the lack of cultural confidence exhibited by the rest of white America are imposed from outside. Although there may well be characteristics
of whites that facilitate this process, this suppression of white identity and interests is certainly not the natural outcome of modernization or any other force internal to whites as a people.
In my opinion, they are the result of the successful erection of a culture of critique in the West dominated by Jewish intellectual and political movements. . . .
The difference from the Soviet Union may well be that in white-minority America it will not be workers and Israelites who are favored, but non-whites and Israelites. Whites may dream
that they are entering the post-racial utopia imagined by their erstwhile intellectual superiors. But it is quite possible that they are entering into a racial dystopia of unimaginable cruelty in
which whites will be systematically excluded in favor of the new elites recruited from the soon-to-be majority. It's happened before.
Faussette draws the same dark conclusion:
Consider for a moment the campaign of demonization of the European American Christian majority and its culture that we see in the media, academia and legislated from the bench.
What if this campaign mirroring the public vilification employed by ardent and merciless communist regimes is completely successful here in North America, not now perhaps, but in a
generation or two, something for our grandchildren to inherit?
Imagine an economic downturn of blackouts, food shortages and riots in which all law enforcement niches are filled by media-molded unassimilated immigrants and indigenous
psychologically prepared minorities; law enforcement personnel conditioned to believe that the people they?re sworn to protect are noxious bigots who deserve the violence they suffer.
Make no mistake, we white Christians in America are being as effectively removed from our lands as are the Palestinians from theirs now. While our disappearance is far less immediate
and painful, the end result is the same. Indeed, if we white Americans were thinking correctly, we would be in the streets chanting ?We are all Palestinians now!?
Instead we are treated to nonsense in the opposite direction, as goyim show fealty to the Jews by proclaiming solidarity. One need only skim news channels to find this. For instance, our
media masters are again trying to divert our attention from Gaza by screaming over the appearance of mere graffiti on a few synagogue walls. (Never mind that in many of these cases ?
in which, by the way, no harm comes to any Jew ? a Jew is found to have perpetrated the act.) Yet with respect to the burning bodies of Palestinian women and children, our media is
subdued.
Shamir correctly interprets this posture: ?The quietude of the West should frighten us well beyond the Middle Eastern context, as it possibly means our civilization is dead. . . . It implies
that the Europeans and Americans have lost the sacral core, and our profaned civilization is doomed to extinction, unless we?ll turn away from the edge of the abyss.?
Is there a solution? James Petras suggests that ?Until we neutralize the pervasive power of the Zionist Power Configuration in all of its manifestations ? in American public and civic life ?
and its deep penetration of American legislative and executive offices, we will fall short of preventing Israel from receiving the arms, funding and political backing to sustain its wars of
ethnic extermination.?
Agreed. But effecting this change will be a monumental task.
One of the first steps is to recognize that your fate as a white American may quickly become as perilous as that of the Palestinians caged into Gaza. Next, follow the advice of Kevin
MacDonald from the column just noted:
Whites need to tell their family and their friends that they have an identity as a white person and believe that whites have legitimate interests as white people. They must accept the
consequences when they are harassed, fired from their jobs, or put in prison for such beliefs. They must run for political office as openly pro-white. . . . No revolution was ever
accomplished without some martyrs. The revolution that restores the legitimacy of white identity and the legitimacy of white interests will be no exception.
Now replay in your own mind the recent scenes of unopposed slaughter and destruction in Gaza. Then imagine that it is you and your family caged and massacred like that. Will this
thought experiment prompt you to at least acknowledge your identity and interests as a white American? It should.
Finally, follow the word of intrepid Internet warrior Justin Raimondo, who just wrote in his column Gaza Is the Future: ?Look at Gaza and see the future. Then go out and do something
about it.? Well said.
Source with hyperlinks: http://www.theoccidentalobserver.net/authors/Connelly-Gaza2.html
---
Obama ? The Judas Goat
Judas Goat\ A goat that leads other goats or sheep to slaughter. Also, one who entices into danger and betrays others. The name is an allusion to Judas Iscariot, who betrayed Jesus
for 30 pieces of silver. (From Merriam Webster?s Dictionary)
Barack Hussein Obama is a Judas Goat.
Extremist Jews guided Barack Hussein Obama?s career from day one, even all the way back to Harvard Law School. Radical Zionist hitman, David Axelrod previously orchestrated the
Jewish-financed and organized defeat of perceived anti-Zionist Sen. Charles Percy. He is the man who ran Obama?s campaign for President and who is his chief handler. Obama?s
campaign was overwhelmingly financed by the most powerful Zionist bankers in the world. His campaign?s largest contribution source was the Zionist international banking firm of
Goldman Sachs. (FEC campaign records). In both Obama?s Senate and Presidential campaign he prostrated himself before AIPAC (American Israel Public Affairs Committee) promising
even more money and blood for Israel?s terrorism than even the supine John McCain, and even more money and blood than the previous Shabbez Goy in the White House, George
Bush. Before the Israeli terrorism and mass murder in Gaza, he went to Israel and said that he supported Israel?s planned murderous terrorism against the men, women and children of
Gaza.
His first act as President-elect was to appoint a rabid Zionist, Israeli dual citizen who served in the Israeli Army as his Chief of Staff, Rahm Emmanuel. As thousands of women and
children in Gaza were killed or maimed, Obama remained silent. Within a few days as President Obama supported indiscriminate American missile strikes in villages of our ally Pakistan, a
clear continuation of Bush?s policies. He completely supports the theft of trillions of American taxpayer dollars to the Zionist international bankers. Eighty percent of American Jews voted
for Obama, and all the main leaders of the Jewish Supremacist state of Israel have proclaimed Obama as the perfect man for U.S. President.
What better for the Zionists to have their own servant perceived as a clean break from the Jewish extremist-controlled Bush administration? What better than for the Zionists than to
have their Shabbez Goy be treated by the world?s press and even by much of the anti-Zionist community as a man of ?real change?? What better for the Zionists than for the world to
think that Obama will be a change from the Zionist-controlled policies when he willing to do anything that Israel demands? What better for the Zionist murderers to have their craven
puppet be looked at by the whole world as a man of honor and integrity and fairness.
In the slaughterhouse, the Judas Goat is often painted with bright colors, adorned with strong, sweet scents to lure the sheep to their pens and to their death. Obama, the Judas Goat of
our time, is looked upon by millions of Zionist-propagandized sheep as the man who will lead them to salvation.
Instead, he leads America, Palestine and the world to the bloody altar of Jewish Supremacism.
Any supposed anti-Zionist who praises Barack Obama is actually aiding this Judas Goat to lead us all to slaughter. Every person who truly opposes Jewish extremism must speak out and
expose the Judas Goat named Barack Obama!
? Dr. David Duke
Former Member of the House of Representatives
State of Louisiana
United States of America
It is up to you the people of the United States who can still think freely, and up to all of the people of the world who are able to see through the deceptions of the Zionist-influenced
Global media ? to get this simple, powerful message to everyone on earth. Email this message to your friends, post it on forums and websites and put links to it on every website,
facebook or other media in the world. Go and seek out media and Internet sites not controlled by Zionist power. Make youtube videos of this message, (use the short audio and find
good illustrative pictures) and post it untill your fingers are worn and tired, print it and mail it to newspapers or any media outlet that has still not fallen under the propaganda of the
Zionists. Let the world know the truth. Person by person, in the USA, Canada, UK, France, Germany, Italy, japan, Russia, China, Africa, Palestine, South America and across the whole
world this Judas Goat must be exposed for what he is, so that when begins to do his evil for Israel, the whole world will know exactly what is going on and resist!
Source : http://www.davidduke.com/general/obama-the-judas-goat_7317.html
------------------------
You or someone using your email adress is currently subscribed to the Lawrence Auster
Newletter. To unsubscribe from our mailing list, please let us know by calling to 1 212 865 1284
Thanks,
Lawrence Auster,
238 W 101 St Apt. 3B
New York, NY 10025
Contact: lawrence.auster at att.net
------------------------
From lawrence.auster at att.net Mon Jan 26 08:57:01 2009
From: lawrence.auster at att.net (Lawrence Auster)
Date: Mon, 26 Jan 2009 17:57:01 +0100
Subject: [Bandung-pm] For Whom the Gaza Bell Tolls -- Part 1 and 2
Message-ID: <20090126165705.GDKW93.cdptpa-omta06.mail.rr.com@3lyw4>
For Whom the Gaza Bell Tolls -- Part 1
By Edmund Connelly for The Occidental Observer
January 16, 2008
?The Israelis can kill whomever they want whenever they want.?
--Paul Craig Roberts
I sometimes think that it?s pointless for Americans to talk much about recent events in Gaza because we know how it will play out ? America will do absolutely nothing to interfere with the
ongoing massacre.
British journalist Robert Fisk reminds us of the drill:
So once again, Israel has opened the gates of hell to the Palestinians. Forty civilian refugees dead in a United Nations school, three more in another. Not bad for a night's work in Gaza
by the army that believes in "purity of arms." But why should we be surprised?
Have we forgotten the 17,500 dead ? almost all civilians, most of them children and women ? in Israel's 1982 invasion of Lebanon; the 1,700 Palestinian civilian dead in the Sabra-Chatila
massacre; the 1996 Qana massacre of 106 Lebanese civilian refugees, more than half of them children, at a UN base; the massacre of the Marwahin refugees who were ordered from
their homes by the Israelis in 2006 then slaughtered by an Israeli helicopter crew; the 1,000 dead of that same 2006 bombardment and Lebanese invasion, almost all of them civilians?
This time around, Israel shows not the slightest compunction about brazenly massacring an imprisoned population in front of the world. But why should they? They know no real
opposition will arise from power centers anywhere on earth. And they continue to have America ? Republicans, Democrats, Christian Zionists and almost everybody else ? in their thrall. In
large part, this is due to what Israel Shamir wrote with respect to Jewish financial mischief: ?The rich Jews buy media so it will cover up their (and their brethren's) misdeeds.?
James Petras also weighed in on Israel?s ongoing war against the Palestinians, writing, ?Israel?s sustained and comprehensive bombing campaign of every aspect of governance, civic
institutions and society is directed toward destroying civilized life in Gaza.? Echoing Shamir, Petras noted that Israel?s attempt to ?purge Palestine of its Arab population? continues without
apology because ?The Israeli totalitarian leaders knew with confidence that they could act and they could kill with impunity, locally and before the entire world, because of the influence
of the US Zionist Power Configuration in and over the US White House and Congress.?
Another voice that showed exasperation with Israel?s actions was that of Taki Theodoracopulos, who wrote, ?Israel can now safely be called the Bernie Madoff of countries, as it has
lied to the world about its intentions, stolen Palestinian lands continuously since 1948, and managed to do all this with American tax payer?s money.?
Perhaps no one, however, is more morally outraged than former Reagan administration official Paul Craig Roberts, who wrote on VDARE:
Caterpillar Tractor makes a special bulldozer for Israel that is designed to knock down Palestinian homes and to uproot their orchards. In 2003 an American protester, Rachel Corrie,
stood in front of one of these Caterpillars and was run over and crushed.
Nothing happened. The Israelis can kill whomever they want whenever they want.
They have been doing so for 60 years, and they show no sign of stopping.
Roberts continued, ?While the rest of the world condemns Israel?s inhumanity, the US Congress ? I should say the US Knesset ? rushed to endorse the Israeli slaughter of the Palestinians
in Gaza.? How pervasive was this endorsement? ?The US Senate endorsed Israel?s massacre of Palestinians with a vote of 100-0. The US House of Representatives voted 430-5 to
endorse Israel?s massacre of Palestinians. . . .? (See here for further details.)
Readers who have followed Roberts in the post-9-11 period know that he has been a persistent critic of Israel?s influence over President Bush and the Congress. He has not changed
his position with respect to Gaza either: ?The US Congress was proud to show that it is Israel?s puppet even when it comes to murdering women and children. The President of the
United States was proud to block effective action by the UN Security Council by ordering the Secretary of State to abstain.?
Two days later, Roberts added to his critique, displaying how fully Bush is a puppet to an Israeli master:
"Early Friday morning the secretary of state was considering bringing the cease-fire resolution to a UN [Security Council] vote and we didn?t want her to vote for it," Olmert said. "I said
?get President Bush on the phone.? They tried and told me he was in the middle of a lecture in Philadelphia. I said ?I?m not interested, I need to speak to him now.? He got down from the
podium, went out and took the phone call." [PM: Rice left embarrassed in UN vote, By Yaakov Lappin , Jerusalem Post, January 12, 2009].
Roberts then turned to a friend?s comments to summarize this exchange:
"Let me see if I understand this," wrote a friend in response to news reports that Israeli Prime Minister Olmert ordered President Bush from the podium where he was giving a speech to
receive Israel?s instructions about how the United States had to vote on the UN resolution. "On September 11th, President Bush is interrupted while reading a story to school children
and told the World Trade Center had been hit ? and he went on reading. Now, Olmert calls about a UN resolution when Bush is giving a speech and Bush leaves the stage to take the
call. There exists no greater example of a master-servant relationship."
Aptly, Roberts concluded, ?In his final press conference, President Bush, deluded to the very end, said that the whole world respects America. In fact, when the world looks at America,
what it sees is an Israeli colony.?
And the behavior of America?s master is none too pleasant, as retired U.S. Air Force Lieutenant Colonel Karen Kwiatkowski recently made clear:
One needs only to look at the death toll (one-sided), the difference in military capacities between Israel and Gaza (shocking) and the kind of arsenals employed by both sides to
determine what is happening. We?ve seen it on the elementary school playground, but this version is played out with incredible destructive force, no supervision, no brave friends, and
no justice.
Not only is incredible destructive force in view for the whole world, a bizarre Israeli response to the slaughter has surfaced: It is the "ultimate spectator sport," in the words of a London
Times reporter.
As a front-page article in the Wall Street Journal also described, from hilltops overlooking Gaza, Israelis would come with lawn chairs and picnics lunches to watch the one-sided death
circus that is Gaza. Israelis ?have made the trek, they say, to witness firsthand a military operation?so far, widely popular inside Israel?against Hamas, the militant group that controls the
Gaza Strip. Over the weekend, four teenagers sat on a hill near Mr. Danino's, oohing and aahing at the airstrikes. Nadav Zebari, who studies Torah in Jerusalem, was eating a cheese
sandwich and sipping a Diet Coke.?
Levinson took quotes from observers: "I've never watched a war before," one said. Meanwhile, a group of Israeli police officers took turns snapping pictures of one another with
smoking Gaza as a backdrop. "I want to feel a part of the war," was one comment.
?On another hilltop overlooking Gaza,? Levinson continued, ?Sandra Koubi, a 43-year-old philosophy student, says seeing the violence up close ?is a kind of catharsis for me, to get rid of
all the anxiety we have inside us after years of rocket fire? from Hamas.?
Perhaps most pointedly comes the testimony of one Jocelyn Znaty, ?a stout 60-year-old nurse for Magen David Adom, the Israeli counterpart of the Red Cross,? who could ?hardly
contain her glee at the site of exploding mortars below in Gaza.? "Look at that," she shouts, clapping her hands as four artillery rounds pound the territory in quick succession. "Bravo!
Bravo!" . . . I am sorry, but I am happy."
Pavel Wolberg/European Pressphoto Agency
Orthodox Jews watched smoke rise over the northern Gaza Strip Tuesday.
Roberts, like Taki and others, put much of the blame for such a spectacle clearly on the shoulders of the American public. ?What is happening to the Palestinians herded into the Gaza
Ghetto is happening because of American money and weapons. It is just as much an attack by the United States as an attack by Israel. The US government is complicit in the war
crimes.?
Repeating charges he has made consistently for years, Roberts laments the fact that "?Our? president was a puppet for a cabal led by Dick Cheney and a handful of Jewish
neoconservatives, who took control of the Pentagon, the State Department, the National Security Council, the CIA, and ?Homeland Security.? From these power positions, the neocon
cabal used lies and deception to invade Afghanistan and Iraq, pointless wars that have cost Americans $3 trillion, while millions of Americans lose their jobs, their pensions, and their
access to health care.?
While Roberts et al. may be right that each and every American taxpayer bears some responsibility for the carnage in Gaza, the fact is that most Americans are tired of violence in the
far-away Middle East. Besides, the economy is in the tank, the NFL playoffs are in progress, and the kids have to go back to school. Everyday life takes priority for most Americans.
Unfortunately, such short-sightedness will not do, for the pitiful denizens of Gaza are not the last targets of the Israeli army or the worldwide network of Diaspora Jews. The dispossession
of the Palestinians since 1948 is but a dress rehearsal for more ambitious dispossessions of non-Jews throughout the world.
Do I exaggerate? I believe that we have to take Israel Shamir seriously when he writes in Cabbala of Power. ?Palestine is not the ultimate goal of the Jews; the world is. Palestine is just
the place for the world state headquarters.?
Shamir has made a fascinating study of the two thousand-year struggle between Jews and non-Jews, particularly Christians. His arguments are far too subtle to summarize here, so
interested parties should consult the above-mentioned book as well as his more recent work, Masters of Discourse. I will simply cherry pick some of his more striking ideas.
Shamir ? an immigrant from Russia to Israel ? holds a low opinion of his fellow Jews in the Holy Land. ?Israelis are the riffraff of World Jewry, sent to conquer the land for the NWO HQ.?
This process is revealed in a parable of the "Messiah's Donkey" often used by religious Jews. This is a story in which disposable secular Jews (the donkey) are used by religious Jews to
attain religious, messianic goals. ?In plain words, spirit always wins over matter; the way of the Messiah of Spirit is to use the Donkey of Matter.?
?The Jews? ? Shamir makes a distinction between organized Jewry and individual Jews ? ?intend to turn Jerusalem into the supreme capital of the world, and its rebuilt temple into the
focal point of the Spirit on Earth.? Should they succeed, unspeakable despair will follow. ?Christianity will die, the spirit will depart from the nations in our part of the world, and our present
dubious democracy will be supplanted by a vast theocratic state. . . . De-spiritualized and uprooted, homeless and lonely, yesterday?s Masters of the World [non-Jews] will become
slaves in all but name.?
Shamir sees a two-pronged approach to this quest for world domination, Zionism and Mammonite Liberalism. ?While Zionism establishes the basis for the NWO HQ, the Mammonite
Liberalism establishes the world-wide slavery. Jabotinsky and Soros are doing different tasks for one system; the Iron Wall and the Open Society are just different names for the same
thing.?
Shamir?s analysis is eerily close to the Dispossessed Majority thesis of Wilmot Robertson, albeit cloaked in theological garb. Robertson described how in the 1960s and 70s white
American Christians ?had become a people of little or no account in their own country.? This was not an accident.
Source with hyperlinks: http://www.theoccidentalobserver.net/authors/Connelly-Gaza.html
-
For Whom the Gaza Bell Tolls -- Part 2
By Edmund Connelly
January 23, 2008
?Palestine is not the ultimate goal of the Jews; the world is. Palestine is just the place for the world state headquarters.? Israel Shamir in Cabbala of Power
"The United States is well on the road to being dominated by an Asian technocratic elite and a Jewish business, professional, and media elite." Kevin MacDonald
?We had no idea that we were about to trade places with the Black man.? Edgar Steele
In Part One of this essay, I argued that it was nearsighted to view the Israeli slaughter of Palestinians in Gaza as an isolated event. Rather, I suggested, the Jews were intent on
eventual world domination. Most certainly this is true with respect to Jewish power over white Christians.
To bolster that claim, I pointed to Wilmot Robertson?s observation in his book The Dispossessed Majority that in the 1960s and 70s white American Christians ?had become a people of
little or no account in their own country.? I then pointed to a theological explanation for this dispossession, turning to the views of Israel Shamir, who wrote, ?Christianity will die, the spirit
will depart from the nations in our part of the world, and our present dubious democracy will be supplanted by a vast theocratic state. . . . De-spiritualized and uprooted, homeless and
lonely, yesterday?s Masters of the World [non-Jews] will become slaves in all but name.?
For those not disposed to a divine view of this kulturkampf between Jews and whites, Shamir?s theological views can be piggy-backed onto secular arguments such as Robertson?s.
Rather than using Robertson?s arguments, however, I prefer to turn to an intriguing essay that appeared in a book edited by the late Sam Francis. Titled ?Race and Religion: A Catholic
View,? the essay was written by New Yorker Richard Faussette. Though Faussette situates his arguments in the Old Testament, his analysis is a sociological one in the mold of
evolutionary psychologist Kevin MacDonald?s theory on group evolutionary strategies.
Faussette?s analysis goes back to biblical times when Jews of that era implemented a system of niche recovery to compensate for their partial displacement by the Assyrians. Faussette
sees this system as being anachronistically employed to this day:
Our enemies are not Assyrians. They are the agents of the global economy; ethnic elites (their borders are where their people are) colluding with our own managerial elites. Mesmerized
by the prospect of fantastic incomes, they are centralizing the world?s economy and abandoning local loyalties for a ?citizenship? of the world. Unable to conquer us militarily, they have
succeeded in engaging our armed forces around the world as they repopulate our urban centers and our law enforcement agencies with an alien elite and an alien underclass rigorously
conditioned by the media.
If you conceived of this as today?s multiculturalism, which Faussette portrays as a new Babel and a recipe for disaster, you would not be wrong. But, should we surrender to this program,
we will suffer what Moses prophesized: ?You will become a horror, a byword, an object lesson to all the peoples amongst whom the Lord disperses you.?
Though some see the system of importing foreign populations as a lapse in judgment, Faussette claims that ?the system is not broken. It has been re-engineered by private interests and
liberal ideologues, lobbying our elected representatives to increase the flow of cheap labor and anything else they can profitably get over the border.?
If this system is not broken, who built it and for what purposes? In essence, the goal is to displace white Americans with non-whites, and in particular white elites with Jews. Shamir also
observed this: ?The Jews compete with the native elites of the Gentile society for the right to exploit the Gentile worker and peasant.? Outcompete is the more appropriate word, for
Shamir found that in 17th-century Ukraine Jewish masters were far more efficient, ?extracting from the natives SIX times more taxes and dues per person than a gentile landlord did.?
In this struggle with non-Jewish leaders, Jews can either massacre or expel their rivals, as they did in Russia during the Revolution. Shamir quotes Solzhenitsyn as follows:
[During the Bolshevik Revolution] executed army officers were Russians, the noblemen, priests, monks, deputies were Russians. . . . In 1920s, the pre-revolutionary engineers and
scientists were exiled or killed. They were Russians, while their place was taken by Jews. The best Russian Psychiatric institute in Moscow, its Russian members were arrested or exiled,
while their place was taken by the Jews. Important Jewish doctors blocked the advancement of Russian medical scientists. The best intellectual and artistic elites of Russian people
were killed, while the Jews grew and flourished in these (deadly for Russians) years.
While much of this has gone down the memory hole, an excellent confirmation of the above can be found in Yuri Slezkine?s expos?, The Jewish Century. Kevin MacDonald later
isolated the anti-Christian eliminationist focus of the Bolshevik attack, which can be found in his review of Slezkine called ?Stalin?s Willing Executioners?? (See here and here.) Chillingly,
Slezkine quotes Leonard Schapiro?s comment that ?anyone who had the misfortune to fall into the hands of the Cheka stood a very good chance of finding himself confronted with and
possibly shot by a Jewish investigator.? The Black Book of Communism estimates that up to twenty million Soviet citizens were murdered during the period of Jewish dominance in the
early decades of the USSR. This is why Slezkine originally coined the phrase ?Stalin?s willing executioners.?
So what does this have to do with America today? A lot, as both Faussette and MacDonald note. For the Jews? ancient displacement strategy is as effective as ever, as Jewish ethnic
activist Earl Raab made clear:
The Census bureau has just reported that about half of the American population will soon be non-white or non-European. And they will all be American citizens. We have tipped beyond
the point where a Nazi-Aryan party will be able to prevail in this country. We [Jews] have been nourishing the American climate of opposition to bigotry for about half a century. That
climate has not yet been perfected, but the heterogeneous nature of our population tends to make it irreversible ? and makes our constitutional constraints against bigotry more practical
than ever.
Because the West could not yet be conquered militarily, the Assyrian strategy of capturing and removing the native population, which demoralized the people and prevented organized
resistance, was untenable. The tactic then became the importation of foreign elements ?to devalue our niches, fragment our communities and place us under foreign administration. The
result is the same.? In other words, as Faussette writes, ?the Jews will recover their niches in the lost nation of Israel which will be a Jewish land under Jewish rule (homogeneous and
religiously unified), but the host nations where Jews settle in Diaspora are condemned to a fractious and imposed proto-Assyrian cultural pluralism (heterogeneous with no dominant
religious influence) that ensures Jewish hegemony in Diaspora.?
Often cloaked as ?anti-racism,? this program of dispossession applies equally to America and Palestine. ?Anti-racism,? Shamir writes, ?is a denial of the autochthon's [native?s] right to
decide his fate; a tool to separate Man from his native landscape. This concept de-legitimizes objections to swamping a land with a flood of immigrants and ruining the society's fabric.?
Again, because Jews in America are incapable of defeating or removing us militarily ? unlike their ability in the Middle East ? they resort to ideological attacks, an important one being the
imposition of their new religion, the Holocaust Narrative. ?Whoever accepts the Holocaust as the most important historical event,? Shamir quotes one thinker as saying, ?is able to carry
out the civil war against the traditionalist majority and becomes a member of the in-group for the globalists.?
Shamir adds how the Holocaust ?also has a theological value as this event is offered to supplant the Crucifixion for believers.? Certainly any Christian even half aware of culture and law
in the last half century must admit a growing emphasis on Jewish suffering and the guilt of the Christian West. There is a reason for this, as Shamir explains:
Slave cults are growing now among the Europeans, and the cult of the Holocaust is one of them. Theologically, this cult is an adaptation of the Jewish spiritual rule for Christian minds,
as it replaces Christ with Israel, Golgotha [Calvary] with Auschwitz, and the Resurrection with the creation of the Jewish state. People who argue with the dogma of Holocaust are met
with treatment the heretics were given in the days of yore. They are excommunicated and excluded from society.
Given the vast power of modern media, Jews have naturally turned to it as a means of control. The fracturing of native populations through use of the media is central to this. Faussette
makes this point with respect to the indigenous white population?s loss of the media:
If the majority of European American Christians held the most lucrative niches in American society, the media would be unable to depict us as a cruel and ?intolerant? majority whose
niches rightfully belong to the victims of ?white hatred and oppression.? The very fact that the media vilification of the European American Christian majority goes on apace is proof
positive that people who identify with us and have a concern for our welfare are no longer in the ascendancy. There may be many more of us, it is true, but we no longer occupy the
elite niches in which power is centralized. Even our ability to depict a positive image of ourselves to our own populations and to the peoples of the world has been wrested from us by
the hands of powerful and persistent detractors.
Examples of vilification of white men and elevation of Jews and other minorities are far too numerous to mention. The list of Holocaust and anti-Nazi films alone is massive. Add to that
the rise of African American movie stars such as Morgan Freeman, Denzel Washington, and Will Smith, most of whose movies fit the numinous Negro narrative, and you will have some
idea of the visual power arrayed against whites.
Faussette makes this clear:
It is not enough to say that the broadcast media are powerful. They create a separate and caustic virtual reality, then broadcast that ideologically driven reality into the homes of millions
of people and dare to suggest that their horrific depiction of us is an accurate reflection of who we really are, what we really do and what our history has really been. We are so saturated
with the propaganda many of us can no longer tell the difference between ideology and reality, nor are we the only ones upon whom this burden of a separate ?reality? has been
imposed. By the time an alien crosses our porous borders he has been conditioned by the international media to believe that the indigenous ?white people? are recent interlopers on their
own land; noxious bigots who stole the land from the noble people who were here before them. Millions of people are fed these overt and subliminal messages every day via continuous
media broadcasts.
The parallels with the propaganda techniques of the Communist Soviet Union, particularly in the early days, are manifest, as Faussette explains: ?Demonizing an indigenous majority
population to turn competing minority populations against them is a genocidal tactic with recent historical precedent.? Like the ?former classes? slated for elimination in Russia, the
American majority is now the targeted class.
The use of terror was prescribed then and is again being used, though ?many of us seem oblivious to what is going on here and now.? The terror comes through the educational and
media propagation of the notion that indigenous white Christians are the villain class. Or, if one prefers Jewish intellectual Susan Sontag?s version, ?The white race is the cancer of
human history.? Operating under the pretext that they are fighting for universal civil rights, Jewish activists, in a sense become the current equivalent of the Jews in Russia who were
?Stalin?s willing executioners.?
An integral part of this terror involves ritual public humiliation, another key aspect of the media?s strategy to demoralize the American majority. First and foremost is the public
dissemination of the message that whites are ?powerless to deflect the media barrage of humiliation and vilification of our race, our various ethnicities, our Christian religion and the
nation?s history.? Whites must now live quietly with the knowledge that infamies committed against them warrant no notice in the public eye, while any assault by an individual white on a
designated minority group will result in ritual condemnation of not only the assailant but the broader majority culture as well.
Thus, it was never just ?in the air? that the media, schools and legal system would take the turn they did in the 1960s against the American majority. Rather, it is another Jewish
movement, as Kevin MacDonald made clear recently in a column on this site:
For nearly 100 years whites have been subjected to a culture of critique emanating from the most prestigious academic and media institutions. . . . But that implies that the submerged
white identity of the white working class and the lack of cultural confidence exhibited by the rest of white America are imposed from outside. Although there may well be characteristics
of whites that facilitate this process, this suppression of white identity and interests is certainly not the natural outcome of modernization or any other force internal to whites as a people.
In my opinion, they are the result of the successful erection of a culture of critique in the West dominated by Jewish intellectual and political movements. . . .
The difference from the Soviet Union may well be that in white-minority America it will not be workers and Israelites who are favored, but non-whites and Israelites. Whites may dream
that they are entering the post-racial utopia imagined by their erstwhile intellectual superiors. But it is quite possible that they are entering into a racial dystopia of unimaginable cruelty in
which whites will be systematically excluded in favor of the new elites recruited from the soon-to-be majority. It's happened before.
Faussette draws the same dark conclusion:
Consider for a moment the campaign of demonization of the European American Christian majority and its culture that we see in the media, academia and legislated from the bench.
What if this campaign mirroring the public vilification employed by ardent and merciless communist regimes is completely successful here in North America, not now perhaps, but in a
generation or two, something for our grandchildren to inherit?
Imagine an economic downturn of blackouts, food shortages and riots in which all law enforcement niches are filled by media-molded unassimilated immigrants and indigenous
psychologically prepared minorities; law enforcement personnel conditioned to believe that the people they?re sworn to protect are noxious bigots who deserve the violence they suffer.
Make no mistake, we white Christians in America are being as effectively removed from our lands as are the Palestinians from theirs now. While our disappearance is far less immediate
and painful, the end result is the same. Indeed, if we white Americans were thinking correctly, we would be in the streets chanting ?We are all Palestinians now!?
Instead we are treated to nonsense in the opposite direction, as goyim show fealty to the Jews by proclaiming solidarity. One need only skim news channels to find this. For instance, our
media masters are again trying to divert our attention from Gaza by screaming over the appearance of mere graffiti on a few synagogue walls. (Never mind that in many of these cases ?
in which, by the way, no harm comes to any Jew ? a Jew is found to have perpetrated the act.) Yet with respect to the burning bodies of Palestinian women and children, our media is
subdued.
Shamir correctly interprets this posture: ?The quietude of the West should frighten us well beyond the Middle Eastern context, as it possibly means our civilization is dead. . . . It implies
that the Europeans and Americans have lost the sacral core, and our profaned civilization is doomed to extinction, unless we?ll turn away from the edge of the abyss.?
Is there a solution? James Petras suggests that ?Until we neutralize the pervasive power of the Zionist Power Configuration in all of its manifestations ? in American public and civic life ?
and its deep penetration of American legislative and executive offices, we will fall short of preventing Israel from receiving the arms, funding and political backing to sustain its wars of
ethnic extermination.?
Agreed. But effecting this change will be a monumental task.
One of the first steps is to recognize that your fate as a white American may quickly become as perilous as that of the Palestinians caged into Gaza. Next, follow the advice of Kevin
MacDonald from the column just noted:
Whites need to tell their family and their friends that they have an identity as a white person and believe that whites have legitimate interests as white people. They must accept the
consequences when they are harassed, fired from their jobs, or put in prison for such beliefs. They must run for political office as openly pro-white. . . . No revolution was ever
accomplished without some martyrs. The revolution that restores the legitimacy of white identity and the legitimacy of white interests will be no exception.
Now replay in your own mind the recent scenes of unopposed slaughter and destruction in Gaza. Then imagine that it is you and your family caged and massacred like that. Will this
thought experiment prompt you to at least acknowledge your identity and interests as a white American? It should.
Finally, follow the word of intrepid Internet warrior Justin Raimondo, who just wrote in his column Gaza Is the Future: ?Look at Gaza and see the future. Then go out and do something
about it.? Well said.
Source with hyperlinks: http://www.theoccidentalobserver.net/authors/Connelly-Gaza2.html
---
Obama ? The Judas Goat
Judas Goat\ A goat that leads other goats or sheep to slaughter. Also, one who entices into danger and betrays others. The name is an allusion to Judas Iscariot, who betrayed Jesus
for 30 pieces of silver. (From Merriam Webster?s Dictionary)
Barack Hussein Obama is a Judas Goat.
Extremist Jews guided Barack Hussein Obama?s career from day one, even all the way back to Harvard Law School. Radical Zionist hitman, David Axelrod previously orchestrated the
Jewish-financed and organized defeat of perceived anti-Zionist Sen. Charles Percy. He is the man who ran Obama?s campaign for President and who is his chief handler. Obama?s
campaign was overwhelmingly financed by the most powerful Zionist bankers in the world. His campaign?s largest contribution source was the Zionist international banking firm of
Goldman Sachs. (FEC campaign records). In both Obama?s Senate and Presidential campaign he prostrated himself before AIPAC (American Israel Public Affairs Committee) promising
even more money and blood for Israel?s terrorism than even the supine John McCain, and even more money and blood than the previous Shabbez Goy in the White House, George
Bush. Before the Israeli terrorism and mass murder in Gaza, he went to Israel and said that he supported Israel?s planned murderous terrorism against the men, women and children of
Gaza.
His first act as President-elect was to appoint a rabid Zionist, Israeli dual citizen who served in the Israeli Army as his Chief of Staff, Rahm Emmanuel. As thousands of women and
children in Gaza were killed or maimed, Obama remained silent. Within a few days as President Obama supported indiscriminate American missile strikes in villages of our ally Pakistan, a
clear continuation of Bush?s policies. He completely supports the theft of trillions of American taxpayer dollars to the Zionist international bankers. Eighty percent of American Jews voted
for Obama, and all the main leaders of the Jewish Supremacist state of Israel have proclaimed Obama as the perfect man for U.S. President.
What better for the Zionists to have their own servant perceived as a clean break from the Jewish extremist-controlled Bush administration? What better than for the Zionists than to
have their Shabbez Goy be treated by the world?s press and even by much of the anti-Zionist community as a man of ?real change?? What better for the Zionists than for the world to
think that Obama will be a change from the Zionist-controlled policies when he willing to do anything that Israel demands? What better for the Zionist murderers to have their craven
puppet be looked at by the whole world as a man of honor and integrity and fairness.
In the slaughterhouse, the Judas Goat is often painted with bright colors, adorned with strong, sweet scents to lure the sheep to their pens and to their death. Obama, the Judas Goat of
our time, is looked upon by millions of Zionist-propagandized sheep as the man who will lead them to salvation.
Instead, he leads America, Palestine and the world to the bloody altar of Jewish Supremacism.
Any supposed anti-Zionist who praises Barack Obama is actually aiding this Judas Goat to lead us all to slaughter. Every person who truly opposes Jewish extremism must speak out and
expose the Judas Goat named Barack Obama!
? Dr. David Duke
Former Member of the House of Representatives
State of Louisiana
United States of America
It is up to you the people of the United States who can still think freely, and up to all of the people of the world who are able to see through the deceptions of the Zionist-influenced
Global media ? to get this simple, powerful message to everyone on earth. Email this message to your friends, post it on forums and websites and put links to it on every website,
facebook or other media in the world. Go and seek out media and Internet sites not controlled by Zionist power. Make youtube videos of this message, (use the short audio and find
good illustrative pictures) and post it untill your fingers are worn and tired, print it and mail it to newspapers or any media outlet that has still not fallen under the propaganda of the
Zionists. Let the world know the truth. Person by person, in the USA, Canada, UK, France, Germany, Italy, japan, Russia, China, Africa, Palestine, South America and across the whole
world this Judas Goat must be exposed for what he is, so that when begins to do his evil for Israel, the whole world will know exactly what is going on and resist!
Source : http://www.davidduke.com/general/obama-the-judas-goat_7317.html
------------------------
You or someone using your email adress is currently subscribed to the Lawrence Auster
Newletter. To unsubscribe from our mailing list, please let us know by calling to 1 212 865 1284
Thanks,
Lawrence Auster,
238 W 101 St Apt. 3B
New York, NY 10025
Contact: lawrence.auster at att.net
------------------------
You or someone using your email adress is currently subscribed to the Lawrence Auster
Newletter. To unsubscribe from our mailing list, please let us know by calling to 1 212 865 1284
Thanks,
Lawrence Auster,
238 W 101 St Apt. 3B
New York, NY 10025
Contact: lawrence.auster at att.net